Hacker News Reader

Comment by rapind | Hacker News Reader

As someone who uses and is generally pleased with Elm (a large part of my product's UI is Elm) I could use more detail on what is different and especially why it is different.

I did find a news post listing some differences, but it didn't really go into "why". A dedicated page outlining the differences / opinions on the changes would help me determine if this is a language I might use.

Having a NodeJS (server) target is definitely interesting.

View on HN

No tuples: I found this to trade some convinience (no need to name anything)for worse refactoring (adding a value to a tuple or reordering the fields breaks everything, doing the same to a record doesn’t).

I also improved pattern matching on records to make them more ergonomic.

No automatic record constructors: same as the above, but in my experience it also confused beginners.

I know of several that actively avoids it in their projects, even enforcing it with a linter rule.

No GLSL: never used it, and don’t know how it works. It also broke when I upgraded the version of the Haskell compiler (Gren’s compiler is written in Haskell). For those reasons, it was removed.

No reactor: never used it

> No tuples: I found this to trade some convinience (no need to name anything)for worse refactoring (adding a value to a tuple or reordering the fields breaks everything, doing the same to a record doesn’t).

Did you mean better refactoring?

He means the tuple feature is convenient but makes refactoring harder than if you instead used a record.

I've long moved beyond Elm, but I'd be surprised is anyone really used reactor. It seemed so completely unfit for purpose and was almost immediately useless if your project was more than a single file. elm-live was simply a requirement no matter how much I tried to avoid adding in extra tooling.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com