I think this is true of compilers in general. There are a number of scheme compilers that output C code out there, I expect if you took the output of one of them and looked at it vs hand written C they would look very different.
Zach ᐧ On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Will White <[email protected]> wrote: > Have you seen the JS that Elm compiles to? I've attached what Elm TodoMVC > <http://evancz.github.io/elm-todomvc/> compiles to. Here's the one of the > first functions: > > function F2(fun) > { > function wrapper(a) { return function(b) { return fun(a,b); }; } > wrapper.arity = 2; > wrapper.func = fun; > return wrapper; > } > > > It's JS, but it's not the kind of application code I'd write in JS. My > point is that Elm application code is really on another level. > > > On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 6:50:52 PM UTC+1, Sarkis Arutiunian wrote: >> >> Recently I read article about Functional programming, all 5 parts >> <https://medium.com/@cscalfani/so-you-want-to-be-a-functional-programmer-part-1-1f15e387e536#.5il2s42gl>. >> Yes it's pretty interesting article, written in interesting way. And I >> really like pattern of 'functional programming', immutability and etc. >> >> >> But there is a question. Where the line between propriety and paranoia? >> >> >> I prefer use native javaScript for everything where I can do it without >> any libraries. Yes exactly you should use some UI libraries like React and >> some module bundler like webpack. But I think propriety of using this tools >> is obvious. It's better to use JSX then use native js to create DOM or it's >> better to use webpack at least to uglify and optimize your code because >> some things just impossible to achieve without webpack. >> >> And we have absolutely opposite situation with Elm. Yes they have some >> features to make function a little bit shorter than you'll do it in vanilla >> javaScript and only in some case. It's not that difference like create >> nodes with JSX or js. >> >> >> And all this stuff about immutability, can be easily achieved in plain >> javaScript. Eventually is Elm code will be converted to plain javaScript >> and not vice versa, so that's mean you can do all that stuff in javaScript >> but for sure there are some features in javaScript which you can't do in >> Elm. And using Elm you are limited with one pattern. And what if it's not >> enough or it's not best solution in some case, what than? For example right >> now I'm working on new CMS for one of my projects, on React/GraphQL/Nodejs >> and hybrid storage MongoDb with mySQL. I would like to use this pattern in >> some cases but I just can't use it everywhere, so that's mean I shouldn't >> use Elm? >> >> >> Don't think that I'm against to Elm. I just want to see opinion of >> others. And I want to see that line, between propriety and paranoia. >> >> >> Thanks. >> > -- > 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. > -- Zach Kessin SquareTarget <http://squaretarget.rocks?utm_source=email-sig> Twitter: @zkessin <https://twitter.com/zkessin> Skype: zachkessin -- 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.
