We need examples: https://bost.ocks.org/mike/example/
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 12:26:25 PM UTC+1, Zachary Kessin wrote: > > Some of this makes me a bit twichy. I think one of Elm's great advantages > is that while its type system is good it is also simple. Having tried > haskell and quickly drowned I am in favor of keeping the types as simple as > possible > > Zach > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 1:11 PM, John Orford <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Totally agree with that also. >> >> I would love a underscore or lo-dash situation where libraries could be >> used as petri dishes for future language features... or just doing cool >> stuff : ) >> >> Perhaps, you could add deprecable new features, which could only be >> included in experimental packages or something... >> >> If the libraries or features take make sense, keep them, if not everyone >> is aware of that they can be axed... >> >> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 at 12:04 Oliver Searle-Barnes <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> Something that I feel isn't acknowledged is that it's ok to have a >>> language with more advanced features for library authors than library >>> consumers. I don't see that it follows that having more advanced features >>> makes the language harder to use for beginners (I'd argue the opposite >>> even). I do see your point though that allowing more powerful abstractions >>> and maintaining ease of use is perhaps something that more powerful FP >>> languages have failed (or not attempted even) to find and careful and >>> patient thought is required. >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, 24 November 2016 11:45:38 UTC+1, John Orford wrote: >>> >>>> Oliver, >>>> >>>> I understand. But... we are swimming in a sea of imperative >>>> programmers. A lot of FP is not obviously better for them. >>>> >>>> From my POV, this is Elm's greatest strength and weakness. >>>> >>>> It would be so easy to be a PureScript and corner a hardcore niche, >>>> where 'power' is everything. >>>> >>>> Elm has a larger goal - to bring FP to the masses. >>>> >>>> I am sure abstractions will come in good time, but they will be added >>>> carefully with a lot of thought. >>>> >>>> So... I totally understand, but there's not a lack of 'powerful' FP out >>>> there, there's a lack of FP for the masses. >>>> >>>> This is extremely challenging in all sorts of ways, and an open >>>> question of whether it's even possible. >>>> >>>> But this I believe is what Elm is aiming to do. >>>> >>>> Who knows whether it will fail or not. No one really knows. I know it's >>>> worth a shot though! >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 at 11:34 Oliver Searle-Barnes <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> I'm definitely still in the process of moving my thinking into a >>>>> functional approach (currently working through Programming Haskell and >>>>> Bartosz >>>>> Milewski <https://www.youtube.com/user/DrBartosz>'s Category Theory >>>>> series on youtube, both recommended by other Elmers so thanks!). The lack >>>>> of abstraction in Elm does seem like a major stumbling point at the >>>>> moment, >>>>> the problems I mentioned above are abundantly obvious for anyone that >>>>> starts to use it (I say this with big love for Elm). I want more people >>>>> to >>>>> be able to enjoy Elm but these issues make it very difficult for >>>>> beginners >>>>> or even mid-level developers to get going quickly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, 24 November 2016 11:00:36 UTC+1, Peter Damoc wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Oliver Searle-Barnes < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The fact remains though that I don't feel I can offer a sound >>>>>>> justification as to why it's far more complicated to do these things in >>>>>>> Elm. Elm strives to be easy for users to understand, in this area it is >>>>>>> decidedly more complicated than the existing alternatives. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The class of problems you described is precisely the class of >>>>>> problems that Object Oriented Programming solves easily. >>>>>> It is the class of problems where, as a library developer, you >>>>>> provide and API and you allow the client to do multiple implementation >>>>>> of >>>>>> an interface, (e.g. the interface of a web-component or the interface of >>>>>> a >>>>>> debounceable app). >>>>>> >>>>>> Implementing something that solves this issue is non-trivial because >>>>>> it can be a source of chaos (complexity). >>>>>> Approaching the Expression Problem >>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expression_problem> Elm chose defer >>>>>> solving it for later implementing only a few practical facilities like >>>>>> toString (allows extension of cases without recompilation) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>> -- >>> 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] <javascript:>. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> 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] <javascript:>. >> 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.
