>
> so, the Model-View-Update triplet *is NOT* the wrong unit of composition 
> for Elm applications? :) 
>
> > How do you propose to split the functionality one has in a highly 
>> complex app with a lot of pages without using those triplets?
>>
>> I don't haha...I just defended their use a few posts ago, complete with 
>> the specific example of the reusable signup form.
>
>
To recap:

   1. Earlier 
   <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/Lo6bG96zotI/0ak6T2DaDgAJ> I 
   said "between 0.16 and today, *we learned that a Model-View-Update 
   triplet is the wrong unit of composition for Elm applications...composing 
   individual functions* was both simpler and consistently led to a much 
   better experience. I've laid out my advice for specifically how to do that 
   here 
   
<https://www.reddit.com/r/elm/comments/5jd2xn/how_to_structure_elm_with_multiple_models/dbkpgbd/>
   ."
   2. Later 
   <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/Lo6bG96zotI/-GOgsoHsDgAJ> I 
   pointed out an example of when it would be useful to use Html.map and 
   Cmd.map to make a reusable signup form, and for that use case it 
   happened to make sense to have a separate model, view, and update.

In (1) I am saying that I expect you'll have a better time if you think 
about building Elm applications in terms of *composing individual functions*, 
not in terms of composing Model/View/Update triplets.

In (2) I am giving an example of a very specific set of circumstances in 
which a separate Model/View/Update makes sense.

In summary: "Here is a useful but complex tool. Always reach for a simpler 
one first." 

>

-- 
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