Wouter, After I found out about elm-polymer library, I tried to reimplement your example but, I've run into issues.
This is as far as I got https://github.com/pdamoc/polymer-exploration The problems are due to the way children are handled. I tried a fix that I remembered from a previous exploration (lazyRegister) but, the rendering is still bad. This is yet another reason I think that Polymer might not be the best way forward. A native Elm solution to Web Components might produce better results both in therms of developer UX and in terms of final deliverables. On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Wouter In t Velt <[email protected]> wrote: > Op zondag 4 december 2016 15:43:40 UTC+1 schreef Peter Damoc: >> >> You're trading one set of boilerplate for another. >> > > Fair enough. I could have pointed that out in the conclusions. > > Both your versions are almost as bad as you are forcing internal details >> of the functioning of the dropdown onto the user of the dropdown. >> > > Could you explain this? I am not sure I follow what you are saying here. > Wouldn't we always enforce some kind of API from the dropdown on the user? > Or what would need to be different in both versions to not "force > internals .. onto the user" ? > > The pure version is indeed more aligned with the current recommendations >> but it is almost as bad from a library user point of view. >> > > Taking the pattern and consequences from a dropdown to a library is > something that I did not consider. Maybe I should have. > > >> In order to have a full treatment of the issue, implement a >> webcomponents/polymer version of the same functionality and then argue that >> the "pure" version is better. >> > > By no means did I intend to make a full treatment of the issue, or claim > that pure is always better than stateful. > Admittedly, the wording of the last paragraphs was too strong, so I > changed that. > > I follow the uptake of integrating web components/ polymer with much > interest. > The argument in the article was made specifically where the dev is > building everything in elm, and wants to structure his/her code when the > app grows. > The implementation of a Polymer version is a different scenario IMHO. > But thank you for the challenge, I'll look into it ;) > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
