Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Module manipulation

2016-09-13 Thread OvermindDL1
On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 8:43:27 AM UTC-6, Joey Eremondi wrote: > > It's also worth mentioning that first class modules are a decent > replacement for type classes. > That is precisely the main reason that I am wanting them. ^.^ Although in that case having OCaml'ish Class

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Module manipulation

2016-09-13 Thread Joey Eremondi
It's also worth mentioning that first class modules are a decent replacement for type classes. On Sep 13, 2016 7:28 AM, "OvermindDL1" wrote: > It seems you are wanting something like OCaml has, first-class modules > that can be passed around like types and data like OCaml

[elm-discuss] Re: Module manipulation

2016-09-13 Thread OvermindDL1
It seems you are wanting something like OCaml has, first-class modules that can be passed around like types and data like OCaml does it? I would love that and it would fix a lot of the verbosity I have. On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 1:23:55 AM UTC-6, Charles-Edouard Cady wrote: > > Would