Your post makes me wonder about an alternate future where browsers just adopted every new environment that wanted to become a standard language for web development. We'd have some horrible mixture of:
javascript, perl, tcl, scheme, emacs-lisp, common-lisp, actionscript, dart, java as a source language, other java-vm languages separately running on a builtin java-vm, java with directx running from cab files on another java-vm, .net platform, ICVM, windows dll activex controls (really*) and webassembly. Slow adoption has got us quite far in browsers. * Not even joking -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_UNIX On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 6:40:09 PM UTC-8, Wyatt Benno wrote: > > Thanks all! I still do not see why ELM can never be compiled directly in > the browser. A V8 engine compiler for ELM? > After all it becomes JavaScript right? > > Elm's benefits are derived from the functional paradigm (no runtime > errors, static types, optimized speed, etc.). > They are trying to make JavaScript more functional, and if used in this > way there are little differences with the benefits of Elm other than > developer preference and ease of learning; However since JavaScript runs in > the browser it will always be more accessible to most people. > > 1) What if I want a header done in Elm, and then a footer with different > function done in Elm but with a standard HTML center. If I compiled two elm > files and connected them to the header and footer they would both contain > overlapping dependencies. > > 2) HTML in ELM looks like div[][div[class "this"][text "does not read > well"]]. This would not make sense to most team members "designers", anyone > who does not no ELM. This would mean that developers would need to manually > change any HTML portion that needs to be in ELM. I could not argue on the > point that JSX is easier to work with for most people because it looks like > plain old HTML. > > 3) When there is an update we would need to go through the entire project > and fix everything for the new version of Elm. > I wonder how NoRedInc deals with this. > > I want to use ELM more in production, it is just really hard to make the > case for it right now. Evan seems busy with a few specific issues at one > time, so I expect progress will be slow. Dropping FRP was a great start to > accessibility! > > Very good hobby language, I hope I can use it in production soon. > > -- 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.
