Let me quote some text from that post to be more precise about what I mean when i say "we need examples"
*Why?* > Examples are lightweight and informal; they can often be made in a few > minutes; they lack the ceremony of polished graphics or official tools. Yet > examples are a powerful medium of communication that is capable of > expressing big ideas with immediate impact. *How?* > I use examples so often that I created bl.ocks.org to make it easier for > me to share them. It lets you quickly post code and share examples with a > short URL. Your code is displayed below; it’s view source by default. And > it’s backed by GitHub Gist <https://gist.github.com/>, so examples have a > git repository for version control, and are forkable, cloneable and > commentable. On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Erkal Selman <[email protected]> wrote: > 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]> 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]> >>> 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]. >>>> 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]. >>> 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 a topic in the > Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > topic/elm-discuss/koIwGaRENhU/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
