Re: [elm-discuss] Emphasizing /r/elm more

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Evan Czaplicki wrote: > I recently talked with folks who moderate the various Elm discussion > forums about the challenges that come up and how we can do better. > > The short version is: *we should start migrating more discussion > to /r/elm

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Feature: 'where' expressions (continued from GitHub)

And do you like that version? It seems to not have the advantages usually claimed for "where" in this discussion. For example, you define "a" before using it. What about "intent first" here? And in some sense, this formulation now looks like a dual to the workaround Joey proposed with "let" to

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Emphasizing /r/elm more

I have never really used Reddit, but I am happy to try it out! That second bullet point in particular has really been wearing down my morale lately. Don't forget, elm-discuss still has top billing on the community page On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Mark Hamburg

[elm-discuss] Re: Type specific messages

This sounds fine to me. It's certainly a lot better than: type Msg = SwitchCowToExpandedReadOnly | SwitchCowToCollapsedReadOnly | SwitchCowToReadWrite | SwitchChickenToCollapsedReadOnly | ... I think it largely hinges on your ability to separate orthogonal behavior as separate types.

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Emphasizing /r/elm more

The web interface to Reddit is abysmal. Email isn't great but Reddit seems incredibly tedious. On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Charlie Koster wrote: > I just wanted to confirm one of your assertions anecdotally. In the past > week I wrote two Elm blog posts and opted to

[elm-discuss] New array implementation has reached version 2.0.0

The new implementation of arrays in Elm has reached version 2.0.0 and is available on elm-package (http://package.elm-lang.org/packages/Skinney/elm-array-exploration/latest) This could end up being merged into core at some point in the future. Please try this implementation in your own code.

[elm-discuss] Re: Emphasizing /r/elm more

I just wanted to confirm one of your assertions anecdotally. In the past week I wrote two Elm blog posts and opted to post them to /r/elm rather than elm-discuss for precisely the first two bullet points you listed. A linear discussion would have been largely unhelpful and distracting. I also

[elm-discuss] Re: Separate files for type declarations and code

I use 3 files: - Model.elm -> Where the model goes - Update.elm -> Where the Msg Type is declared and the update function - View.elm -> The View And for the root I have a Route.elm where I put the coding/decoding of the url and ad App(or Main).elm The Rest part from the Kris Jenkins

[elm-discuss] Emphasizing /r/elm more

I recently talked with folks who moderate the various Elm discussion forums about the challenges that come up and how we can do better. The short version is: *we should start migrating more discussion to /r/elm .* Now the long version! How Things Are Now

[elm-discuss] Re: Christmas holiday projects.

On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 11:30:27 PM UTC, Rupert Smith wrote: > > it is quite easy to map a Java Bean to this once you know how! > Very inefficient, but it works: https://github.com/rupertlssmith/elm-java/blob/master/elm-render/src/main/java/com/thesett/elm/ElmRenderer.java#L89 -- You

[elm-discuss] Re: Christmas holiday projects.

On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 11:02:51 PM UTC, Emmanuel Rosa wrote: > > Yes, it's message based. A Verticle receives messages from the Vert.x > event bus, does it's computation (producing side-effects if needed) and > then produces messages. Hmm... I'll certainly be pondering this idea :) > Are

[elm-discuss] Re: Christmas holiday projects.

Yes, it's message based. A Verticle receives messages from the Vert.x event bus, does it's computation (producing side-effects if needed) and then produces messages. Hmm... I'll certainly be pondering this idea :) On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 5:39:59 PM UTC-5, Rupert Smith wrote: > > On

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Christmas holiday projects.

On Monday, January 2, 2017 at 3:24:46 AM UTC, Richard Haven wrote: > > Sounds fantastic. > > About having to "warm up" the JIT runtime: > > "Trying to outsmart a compiler [or runtime] defeats much of the purpose of > using one." -- Kernighan & Plauger > It would be great if the JVM could store

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Elm "faster than JavaScript" (version 0.18) - NOT - Parts I and II...

On Tuesday, 3 January 2017 01:14:57 UTC+7, Bob Zhang wrote: > > Hi Gordon, >Thanks for your lengthy reply. >I didn't try to convince you that OCaml is better than Haskell, they > are different styles : ). It just feel a little weird that "when you want > performance, you should switch

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Feature: 'where' expressions (continued from GitHub)

@Janis, I suppose the `where` version of that formation would have to be: f tree = work where a = ... work = case tree of Leaf x -> -- using a and b where b = ... Node s t -> -- using

[elm-discuss] Re: The Style Elements Library: a different approach to styling

Hello! Essentially there are some things I'd like to do that I wouldn't be able to express in elm-css (With this being said, elm-css is super-awesome, and this style-elements library is still experimental). I'm writing an article that goes more into detail but here's a general overview.

[elm-discuss] Game entities design question

Hello Elm people! I'm making a 2D video game to familiarize myself with Elm and I have a design issue I would like to hear your advice on. In my game I have different UI entities with different behaviours, for example: - Some are collidable with the player / other entities, but other are

Re: [elm-discuss] Feature: 'where' expressions (continued from GitHub)

Greeting, and a happy new year to all the readers of this thread; The terms ‘let’ and ‘where’ are kinda widely understood among the *general public*, in Canada at least. The two terms are introduced in elementary school mathematics simultaneously with variables — I think grade three. A simple

[elm-discuss] Re: Separate files for type declarations and code

Prolific Elm programmers seem to have come to the same conclusion as well: http://blog.jenkster.com/2016/04/how-i-structure-elm-apps.html On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 6:29:08 PM UTC-5, Brian Marick wrote: > > To avoid circular dependencies, I find myself putting type declarations in > one

Re: [elm-discuss] Weird bug where messages passed to the wrong 'component'

Impressive, even if it does not - at first sight - feel like it addresses my issue (as I have no lazy code) On Saturday, 31 December 2016 21:21:09 UTC+1, Mark Hamburg wrote: > > Tracked down and reported against the virtual DOM but the short summary > for anyone else seeing routing problems —

Re: [elm-discuss] Separate files for type declarations and code

I do it, but call it xx.Model.elm On Sunday, 1 January 2017 00:37:41 UTC+1, Martin DeMello wrote: I do the same thing in both ocaml and elm code. It's a pretty common > pattern. > > martin > > On Dec 31, 2016 3:29 PM, "Brian Marick" > wrote: > >> To avoid circular

[elm-discuss] Re: Christmas holiday projects.

Interesting. Would the technique work for business logic only (no UI)? I'm interested in creating pure functional Vert.x Verticles, so my idea is to write them in Frege. But, if it can be done with Elm... :) Vert.x already uses Nashhorn for their JavaScript support. To perhaps... Elm could be