[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-07 Thread Frankie Sardo
Thanks Mark for this fantastic and very detailed answer. I never thought about applying regression to a UI state and I definitely want to mull about the idea further. My gut feeling tells me that manually informing the shrinker wether it's a good or bad state is gonna be too much work but hey

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-06 Thread Max Goldstein
Oops, that second annotation should be viewHelper : { a | name : String } -> Html Msg -- 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 elm-discuss+unsubscr...@go

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-06 Thread Max Goldstein
I see now. You want to see a UI widget in many possible states for the purposes of seeing a visual regression. (By "widget", I mean some piece of HTML generated by a function, not the loaded word "component", which usually implies state. Although it could be either.) Without saying too much, I

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-06 Thread Frankie Sardo
Thanks for your answer Max, When I think about using fuzzers outside elm-test one of the use cases I have in mind is something à la devcards https://github.com/bhauman/devcards If you don't know about it it's a very useful tools used by the clojurescript community to mount a UI using different

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-05 Thread Max Goldstein
Hi Frankie, thanks for trying Elm, glad you like it! > But why isn't the ability to create fuzzy records/data available outside > that package? What I usually do is to stub out the UI given a certain model > type. Being able to call fuzzy generators in my Main namespace to populate > the mode

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-05 Thread David Andrews
A syntax that would make sense with current trends in elm is something to the effect of: model |> Record.map .val1 increase |> Record.update .val2 42 This of course relies on `Record.map` and `Record.set` which do not exist and (ab)uses .field syntax in ways which don't actually work. On

[elm-discuss] Re: One month with Elm, two questions

2016-12-05 Thread Wouter In t Velt
Op maandag 5 december 2016 21:00:35 UTC+1 schreef Frankie Sardo: > > Why does the update syntax accept just a new value instead of accepting a > function that updates (or creates) the new value? > Don't know about Clojure, but Elm likes you to be explicit and consistent about functions, meaning: