I could have phrased this more carefully. I meant that we can't blithely pass random strings out to JavaScript without some formality of defining that API. My point about type systems is only salient so far as to say "JS doesn't have union types so there's no direct mapping."
> It makes sense to focus on other issues that are more important BUT, people > are having enough troubles with boilerplate introduced by decoders that this > could easily be considered a priority. I agree. Increased ergonomics for interop are important. I don't really care if that's static code generation, automatic en/decoders, or something else entirely. But the fact that questions like this keep coming up tells me that the user experience around ports and value passing could improve. Same goes for JSON, actually! I suspect solving one will heavily inform the other. -- 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.
