On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 5:34:20 PM UTC, Lourens Rolograaf wrote: > > Please no. Not every Haskell feature should have a place in elm, > especially if there is already a construct that works (and overlaps 100%?) > Please do not make elm2016, elm2017 or coffeeElm, with all kinds of > syntactic sugar because some user from another language still thinks this > way. >
+1 from me. Very much enjoying how Elm is keeping things simple and trying to avoid overlapping features. -- 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.
