I am not interested in campaign, it's not fun. But I cannot help replying when I see some inexact arguments... elm is a reasonably fast language, I think it might run even faster than purescript, enjoy your work! On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 4:55 AM Robin Heggelund Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Actually tree shaking will do absolutely nothing for Elm code as Elm > compiles everything into a single module that all highly indirectly > references itself. It would help with bucklescript as it outputs modules, > but bucklescript already tree-shakes as part of its compiler optimizations > anyway. > > > This is false. You are correct that Elm compiles everything into a single > module, but this means that tree-shaking becomes *easier*, not harder. It > also makes name-mangling much easier, as everything is local-scope. With > Elm code, tree-shaking can be done with Uglify.js. Just tell uglify to warn > you when it removes a function, and you'll see it removes *a lot* of code. > > -- > 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.
