Richard, Regarding the user form, you said that what I asked is trivial in Elm. Do you have some kind of sample code that you can share or, if you would be so kind, could you post some sample repository that does that? I would *LOVE* to be proven wrong about that. I would love to see some simple Elm code that outputs a form that looks like it came from 2016 and go "oops, my bad, sorry for wasting everyone's time".
Regarding the "Elm at work" and React. Yes, you (NoRedInk) might have always lived in that world but this doesn't make that world the best world. It's just the most familiar world for *you*. Regarding using Graphics.* in production, I feel I need to clarify something. I was not arguing for using Graphics.* in production, that library was never ready from my perspective. What I was arguing for was something akin to SemanticUI implemented using the approach that Graphics.* had. For example, using a button from Graphics is a better experience than using a button from Html. When I was decrying the abandonment of Graphics.* I was not decrying the fact that the library does not work with 0.17, I was decrying the fact that the reason for creating that library has been abandoned. That reason was allowing someone to create a UI without ever having to touch HTML/CSS/JS Regarding elm-mdl. I am well aware of the release of 6.0.0. I was not arguing that people are not still fighting. What I said was that "*they were explicitly or implicitly dismissed"*. If you want me to be more explicit, I was thinking about the discussions around boilerplate that prompted elm-parts, the difficulties around geometry that prompted debois/elm-dom. The component ideas around elm-mdl are at best tolerated. I apologize if what I said was hurtful, it is not my intention to hurt anyone. Maybe some of my own pain dripped into my words. On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Richard Feldman < [email protected]> wrote: > Ouch, those are some strong words... D: > > I agree that the docs for reusable Elm Architecture components are not > published. Fair point. > > I can't say I agree with the rest, though. > > *Do you have a story of someone implementing a simple user form in Elm and >> enjoying both the experience and the result?* >> > > *raises hand* > > This is trivial in Html/CSS/JS land with the help of (take your pick: >> Bootstrap, SemanticUI, AUI, etc.) >> > > This is also trivial in Html/CSS/JS *without* the help of any of those. > > It's also trivial in Elm. > > It's just a trivial project...why would you need a nontrivial component > hierarchy to implement a simple user form? > > Graphics.* elements were a huge step in the right direction (API wise) and >> people loved them but they were abandoned without an alternative. >> >> And now we live in a world where the best path for approaching Elm is >> embedding it into a React component. :( >> > > The thing is, from the perspective of "using Elm at work," we've always > lived in that world. > > The only folks I know of who used Graphics.* in production are CircuitHub, > and they embedded multiple Elm widgets inside an existing HTML/JS page. I'm > not sure if the host was precisely React, but regardless, they followed > exactly the same path Evan is writing about here. Nobody has done a > scratch-rewrite at work and succeeded, as far as I know. > > Also, Graphics.* has not been "abandoned without an alternative" > considering it's been updated for 0.17 > <https://github.com/evancz/elm-graphics>. Anyone who thinks it's a good > choice for work has just as much ability to use it today as they have for > the past 3 years! > > There have been people who have tried to approach this (e.g. elm-mdl) but >> they were explicitly or implicitly dismissed. >> > > Huh? elm-mdl is alive and well - its latest release was less than two > weeks ago <https://github.com/debois/elm-mdl/tree/6.0.0>. > > > I get that you've venting, but aside from the complaint that the guide is > unfinished, these other objections seem to be more hurtful than accurate. > >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Elm Discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- There is NO FATE, we are the creators. blog: http://damoc.ro/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
