> Elm’s release cycle is (very) slow on purpose. ...
> While the language doesn’t get frequent updates (and that’s a good thing!), ...
> Why is it a good thing that Elm doesn’t get frequent updates? First of all, it means your code will last a long time! It also means the language is very stable, because features are carefully thought out before being implemented.
I have no problem with people enjoying Elm and acknowledging the bugs. I really dislike that this site gets posted every time people point out that there hasn't been an update in four years. A four-year break between updates is not "all part of the plan". It's not a slow release cycle. It's a sign that the creator ran out of steam but didn't want to delegate to a successor.
You seem to be reasonable in your approach to Elm, and that's great. But there absolutely is a contingent that tries to pretend that this four-year hiatus is part of Evan's master plan for Elm and is "a good thing", and it's reasonable for the HN crowd to call that out as problematic.