I've got a situation where I've got task that will always succeed, and I 
want to know the best practice for using it with Task.perform.

The task itself is a Task.sequence of tasks that may individually fail, and 
I want to report the result - success or failure - for each of them. So 
there's no meaningful failure mode that I can find for the final 
Task.perform.

I've seen a suggestion in this group for defining a performSucceed function 
(https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/5Q9ktTuavgY/mGk3PVn7CgAJ), and 
this seems perfectly reasonable to me. But I'm also trying to write elm as 
idiomatically as I can, so I wanted to know if this is generally considered 
"correct".

Similarly, if my approach (i.e. aggregating a bunch of results into a 
sequence of success-failure Results) is wrong-headed, I'm happy to 
entertain alternative implementations. 


-- 
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 elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to