I'm not sure I understand exactly what this has to do with Elm. Based on this example <https://wende.github.io/elmchemy/stable/> this appears to be a transpiler that uses syntax *similar* to Elm.
For example: 1. In the pattern matches, you pattern match on tuples without the open and close parens. So this is not valid Elm code. 2. It appears that the ffi function is allowing you to bring in impure Elixir functions. So now effects are not captured in the types. The second one in particular is such a divergence from the core design of Elm that I don't see how it makes sense to call it by the same name. So again, this does not appear to be related to Elm except in that the syntax is similar. Is that a correct assessment? On Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 1:42:38 PM UTC-7, Krzysztof Wende wrote: > > Hello there everyone > > I think my project is ready enough to share it with you all. > > I'm a diehard longtime Erlang / Elixir programmer, and I always searched > for a way to write static typing for Erlang. > After 5th attempts to implement Hindley-Milner on Elixir's AST I decided > that it's time to try something else. > > So here it is: > > > https://www.reddit.com/r/elm/comments/67v2so/elm_on_fully_distributed_backend_meet_elmchemy/ > > <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Felm%2Fcomments%2F67v2so%2Felm_on_fully_distributed_backend_meet_elmchemy%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGPNzBt63GPnKOOKZW10Qfj90owgQ> > > Elm to Elixir compiler. > Please enjoy, and please contribute! > > Constructive critique welcome > > PS. Yes. I am aware of alpaca-lang and purerl. I'll gladly answer why I'm > not satisfied enough with these to anyone wondering > -- 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.
