I seem to remember that the discussion to keep or remove range syntax was done here on the mailing list, and a lot of people had no hard feelings about it going away. This was very much a community decision.
tirsdag 15. november 2016 16.19.54 UTC+1 skrev Andrew Radford følgende: > > I don't think flippantly dismissing anyone who abandons Elm as having a > tenuous connection is fair. A lot of existing users, especially long time > users who when they started, may have done so because of the 'niceties' > like this, and they are now being slowly eroded. Maybe you could say they > are now better off going to purescript/websharper/whatever, but they are > also the guys actually using Elm to get real stuff done, and often act as > evangelists /'recruiters' to bring more newcomers to Elm in the first > place. Simplifying Elm to attract the JS hordes may be a good way to grow > the user base, but it will come at the expense of some of these guys > leaving, which is a bit sad. > > As usual, it's a tricky (but hopefully correct) BDFL decision for the good > of the language ecosystem and usage, but not a clear slam-dunk for the > language itself according to a lot of people. > > On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 13:47:43 UTC, Max Goldstein wrote: >> >> If someone was so tenuously commuted to Elm that this syntax removal >> drives them away, oh well. >> >> >> -- 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.
