Could it be that you've run into an issue like the one described bellow ?
https://williambert.online/2013/06/allow-cors-with-localhost-in-chrome/
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Bryan Murphy wrote:
> I'm having trouble calling Http.send on an API that requires basic
>
I'm having trouble calling Http.send on an API that requires basic
authentication. I collapsed the key part down into a single function:
httpGet : JsonDecode.Decoder value -> String -> String -> Task.Task
Http.Error value
httpGet decoder authorization url =
let request =
{ verb = "GET"
Don't get me started on IT departments that mandate the use of old, buggy,
insecure browsers that no longer have vendor support across their
organisations! If their users get hit with browser-based attacks that
compromise customer data the org could be liable.
Maybe it could accept either a promise or a (callback) function and behave
accordingly? Anyone targeting IE could then decide whether to use callbacks
or add a shim.
On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 7:46:55 AM UTC+10, James Wilson wrote:
>
> Good point, I had node in the back of my mind but
That certainly got me on the right track. Thanks again.
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 1:44:20 PM UTC-5, Gabe Krambs wrote:
>
> Good question. Will play and come back. Thanks!
>
> On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-5, OvermindDL1 wrote:
>>
>> If the data is not available at `init`
Awesome! Best of luck with it! <3
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:43 PM Charles-Edouard Cady <
charlesedouardc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks a lot, Richard, it makes much more sense now!
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Elm Discuss"
Good point, I had node in the back of my mind but somehow forgot what they
did!
On 24 Aug 2016 10:45 p.m., "Maxwell Gurewitz" wrote:
> It'd be more in line with community standards if the callback followed the
> node convention
>
> App.ports.myTaskFunc = function(val, cb)
It'd be more in line with community standards if the callback followed the
node convention
App.ports.myTaskFunc = function(val, cb) {
cb(null, val + 2);
}
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 11:57:04 AM UTC-7, James Wilson wrote:
>
> It wouldn't be hard to provide a promise shim, although
It's really about finding what browsers elm code won't run on.
On the project I'm working on, IE8 is in scope because we still have a
significant number of users using it. If I want to introduce elm, it's
easier to say it runs without a problem than to say some features won't
work, or we need
Thanks a lot, Richard, it makes much more sense now!
--
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...@googlegroups.com.
For more options,
It wouldn't be hard to provide a promise shim, although I'm not sure how I
feel about that.
Callbacks would be the well supported option, although the interface to
promises maps better. Promises can only resolve/reject once, always return
something, and the function attached to the task port
Good question. Will play and come back. Thanks!
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-5, OvermindDL1 wrote:
>
> If the data is not available at `init` then when is it available and why
> are you unable to send a command on 'that' event?
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 10:01:18
It would be nice if 'Date' was a valid port type, where the date object is
just created by passing whatever-it-is into a javascript `Date(thing)`
constructor before being converted to Elm. That would cover the
significant majority of Dates-Through-Ports cases.
Custom port converters would
typo: should have written "i.e.its return type needs to be Html msg instead
of 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
It works fine at least in IE11 and Edge, of which my app is tested in and
works without issue. Do you not mean just old versions like IE8 and older
(which need to die)? Or what about 9 and 10 as well?
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 10:38:39 AM UTC-6, Rex van der Spuy wrote:
>
> Just wish to
>
> While I understand that not breaking things up too often is sound advice
> in elm, I still think this doesn't answer my question
Here is concretely what I'd do:
type alias Model =
{ routes : List Route
, hovered : Maybe Int
, selected : Maybe Int
, map : Map.InternalModel
,
If the data is not available at `init` then when is it available and why
are you unable to send a command on 'that' event?
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 10:01:18 AM UTC-6, Gabe Krambs wrote:
>
> I have an SPA that has a page that includes a chart. I'm using a JS port
> to activate/send data
My only comment would be that the interface should not rely on promises,
which are not supported by IE. Instead it should use node style callbacks.
On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 8:31:07 AM UTC-7, James Wilson wrote:
>
> The problem
>
> ports as they stand are fundamentally incompatible with
Yeah, a number has specific advantages and disadvantages vs ISO date.
Neither is strictly better, just different trade-offs.
You mention decoding. To me it seems better to auto-decode, using two
records if necessary, than to employ Json.decode. It's also conceptually
more simple (record to
Ah, well forget everything I said then.
That sounds like it's worth opening a bug report for.
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Rex van der Spuy
wrote:
> Just wish to alert everyone that Elm's port code will not work with any
> version of IE without a ployfill for
Just wish to alert everyone that Elm's port code will not work with any
version of IE without a ployfill for `Object.assign`
(https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/assign)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>
> Just break it into modules so your similar functions are grouped together
> in files. Use them just like you already are.
>
The part I don't understand is: how do you create UI components that
maintain their internal state without nesting them as child components?
--
You received this
Our primary application allows photographers to upload hundreds/thousands
of images for portfolio display. image delivery, etc. I guess you could say
that our app is generally driven by image uploads. I would love to see this
functionality provided by Elm, rather than having to use ports...
On
I have an SPA that has a page that includes a chart. I'm using a JS port to
activate/send data to a chart.js chart. When the page is loaded, I'd like
to send the chart data via the port. I'm able to wire the commands up fine
on events (like a select change, for example), but am at a loss for
Just break it into modules so your similar functions are grouped together
in files. Use them just like you already are. We did a bit of this
here:
https://www.dailydrip.com/blog/elm-pair-programming-josh-adams-and-luke-westby-pairing-on-colluder
On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 11:29:31 PM
25 matches
Mail list logo