Richard, this is the post I had been remembering: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/Y1B6kKdXCNw/5Ky57c-IAQAJ
Sounds like these are other folks, aside from CircuitHub, that have been using Graphics.* in production (but I don’t know for sure what your definition of “in production” is; does an in-house tool count?). And would you agree that what you said in your message about continued ability to use Graphics.* does not seem to be a reality for them? BTW, it’s also remarkable that the plea for help/guidance expressed in that posting didn’t get any response. At least not on the mailing list. 2016-07-09 10:45 GMT+02:00 Richard Feldman <[email protected]>: > 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. > -- 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.
