Thanks for pointing me to that, and the Justification section therein answers my next question. However, I don't see why it makes sense to conflate the use of the web storage API with a cache pattern. It seems to me that the best way to do this would be to make the low-level API available and implement a cache on top of that.
On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 2:55:42 AM UTC-4, Peter Damoc wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 8:38 AM, David Andrews <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I would really like to be able to use local storage in elm. There have >> been several libraries that implement this, but none of them have been >> updated to elm 0.17. So far the advice I've seen is just to wait, but I'm >> tired of waiting. >> > > It's not really storage when you have a hard limit of 5MB of data. > persistent-cache <https://github.com/elm-lang/persistent-cache> will > probably end up covering the uses for that kind of functionality. > > You should be using ports but if you really really want to use the > unreleased library, fork it, tag it with 1.0.0 and install it with > elm-github-install. > > > -- > There is NO FATE, we are the creators. > blog: http://damoc.ro/ > -- 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.
