Sorry, I didn't mean es6 module, I meant map one ocaml (or elm) module to
one runnable js module(amdjs, commonjs, or es6) so you get separate
compilation.

This is just my observation , please take it with a grain of salt: in
general, it takes 20ms-80ms for BuckleScript to compile a single file, but
that's almost all you need for BuckleScript dev feedback loop, in elm, it's
different, you need recompile that module and regenerate a monolithic js
file, the larger project it gets , the worse compilation time you get in
elm mode. If you have experience in C++, you know the bottle neck used to
be linking, it is quite common for a c++ project to spend 20minutes in
linking.

I don't how much elm is performance engineered, but we are very sensitive
about performance even in nanoseconds level (
https://github.com/bloomberg/bucklescript/pull/1082), this little
engineering will add up
On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 9:23 PM GordonBGood <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Monday, 16 January 2017 02:54:17 UTC+7, Bob Zhang wrote:
>
> Hi Gordon,
>
> It is not uncommon to see 100 times slowness when building Elm vs OCaml in
> incremental build (dev time), the reason is that Elm (correct me if I am
> wrong) always need a link time, so whenever your change a file, it will
> trigger the linker, this will get significantly worse if your project is in
> not small. While BuckleScript compiles one OCaml module to one ES6 module,
> it does not need link during dev time, best for incremental build.
>
>
> Hi Hongbo, that was interesting, especially in what you way about why Elm
> may compile very much slower then OCaml.  If the difference is just link
> time (which linking for all makes it inherits from haskell) then this is
> surely fixable?  Can't Elm do the same as BucketScript - compile to ES6
> modules?
>
> In fact, I don't see why the insistence that these JS compiler languages
> compile to ES5 at all:  it made sense in 2012 with the Elm project was
> started, but now all mainline browsers and platforms have been updated to
> near 100% ES6 compatibility.  Or do the compilers such as Elm want to
> continue to support Internet Explorer (which will never be updated) forever?
>
> --
> 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/Um7WIBTq9xU/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.

Reply via email to