It's great that Elm can appeal to new programmers, but it's mainly targeting web developers. As such, things like max/min, ||/&&, and "string" are going to stick around. No need to reinvent what's been standard(-ish) since C.
The biggest name annoyance, IMHO, is *filter*. It doesn't immediately convey whether you're selecting in or out. For my money, Ruby got this one right: *select* and *reject*. They sound similar and they are similar, and the names convey which way the predicate goes. I wouldn't be adverse to stealing a few other Ruby or near-Ruby names; perhaps List.includes instead of member, and reduce to replace foldl (dropping foldr and renaming it fold could also work). That said, I'm not convinced much of this will happen. Evan is a "big picture" guy, and this would break a lot of code, although deprecation (having both copies for awhile) could help. -- 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.
