On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Max Goldstein <[email protected]> wrote:
> Respectfully, the discussions around components keep happening because > people start them. Asking "how do I have stateful components with > closure/nesting" falls prey to the XY problem, and also misses a lot of the > philosophy of language design that Evan has talked about, most recently in > his elm-conf keynote <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSjbTC-hvqQ>. To > paraphrase, Elm is a young language and we're more concerned with doing > things right for the future than making a good language today. Another key > quote from his status updates: *choose not to block*. Going around and > demanding new language features that fit your style of code is not helpful. > FWIW, I appreciate Peter's questions, and I don't interpret "What am I missing?" and "Why not have...?" as demands. I like Evan's approach to language change and anticipate it will lead to a better Elm. As we gather the batch of problems that will lead to insight, I think the user stories and context around them are also important. -- 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.
