On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 4:19:31 AM UTC, Mark Hamburg wrote: > > One doesn't need them to be asynchronous but making them asynchronous > helps reinforce the notion that this is happening outside the Elm universe. > And if you want monads, Elm's tasks are monadic. >
I really want to disagree with you because it makes it a PITA when you just want to call a pure function written in js, but I have to concede that you are right. If making simple synchronous calls to javascript was the supported mechanism for interfacing, the elm package repo would very quickly get poluted with js code that causes runtime exceptions and it not portable. Another advantage is that it encourages people to write pure functions in Elm in order to share their work, and we all benefit from that. Best thing to tell people looking for 'unsafe' modules in Elm then, is to tell them that we already have them it is just that the keyword is 'native', and that the platform is protected from such unsafe code by not officially supporting 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.
