Roc – A fast, friendly, functional language

Re:Roc – A fast, friendly, functional language by satvikpendem on Monday November 20, 2023 @02:18PM (#38352989)

It's not about moral dealings, it's about whether I can trust the creators to not mess up a second time if they had already messed up once. We were shipping Elm in production and we moved away because any issues that were brought up that we wanted to see solved were swept away. Eventually it wasn't worth keeping the Elm codebase around. So, why should I trust one of the same people again? We already learned an expensive lesson one time around.

> When it comes to Roc and It's community..ask yourself.

Sorry, but this kind of faux niceness is precisely what stopped people from asking about issues, as it was always argued that asking about such issues was not "useful," after some time. So yes, I do feel the need to bring up this topic if only for others to evaluate the creators themselves rather than only have "good" things to say that "really need" to be said.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Roc – A fast, friendly, functional language by weatherlight on Monday November 20, 2023 @03:51PM (#38354526)

So RF being questionably rude in a PR comment caused you company to drop apiece of technology?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Roc – A fast, friendly, functional language by satvikpendem on Monday November 20, 2023 @03:58PM (#38354634)

One cut among many. Another was the insistence of Evan to cut out escape hatches and insist that everything be done solely through Elm. It is not just one person, the entire community was part of the problem, in one way or another. I don't think about Elm much anymore but what I do think of it does not inspire confidence at its creators' future endeavors. Of course, if people want to use it, by all means, but being burned once, not just technologically but also financially, I would not want to be burned once more.

[ Parent | on HN ]