In the lecture Peter links to, the word "closure" is just being used to mean a function `a -> a`, where the return type matches the argument type. Like the mathematical sense of "the integers are closed with respect to addition."
Its a useful property for a function to have, but in the sense used here, it's not really related to the question of components or private state. On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Max Goldstein <[email protected]> wrote: > Closure sounds like a nice property in theory. In practice, it's built on > the idea that you have to hide things, because things tend to break and > encapsulation is the only way to keep that breakage from spiraling out of > control. But in Elm, things don't break very often, and when they do the > compiler is there to catch them. So don't worry about components, just use > functions. > > That said, there's a very important point in OP about state for HTML tags. > For example, the reuse section of the guide has an example with > checkboxes. These boxes send messages to toggle their state when they are > clicked. But, there is no way to pre-populate the state of the checkboxes > for example with information you get from the server. In another thread, I > think this is worth discussing. If some HTML components are state full what > do we do about that, without jumping down the rabbit hole of components? > > -- > 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.
