Re: [elm-discuss] Literature reviews repo

Great idea! What can be done to ensure that these efforts wouldn't go in vain? On 1 May 2017 at 10:14, Oliver Searle-Barnes wrote: > In https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/elm-discuss/yHiAJ_wcG3c Max > proposes that we put together some literature reviews. If we're to >

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Moving on

The thing is that this exact kind of cache (LRU) might not work for all people, so it'd be great to have barebones interface to localStorage/sessionStorage/etc. Then higher level abstractions, like persistent-cache, could be easily built on top of it. On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 at 18:24, Mark Hamburg

Re: [elm-discuss] Resources guiding towards shifting to Functional Thinking

I recommend http://elmprogramming.com/. It isn't solely focused on functional programming, but has great illustrations of some concepts that could initially be hard to grasp. For example http://elmprogramming.com/string.html#filtering-a-string On 26 April 2017 at 12:13, Jiggneshh Gohel

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Moving on

Forking is already kind of happening. Not per se, but some people decided to stick with 0.16 and FRP. And switched to PureScript for new projects. This still fresh talk covers such a case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kGoaUqcq4A Brief summary of why they didn't use Elm for other projects They

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Moving on

The number of similar voices regarding community process and amount of frequently requested missing features/native libraries (like binary support and better JS interop) show a problem. No matter how amazing and performant Elm will ever be, newcomers will be discouraged by everlasting begging for