|
|
|
|
|
by mikekchar
3280 days ago
|
|
Here's a challenge for you: what syntax would be better? I don't mean that in a derogatory way. I think you are right that the syntax (being very foreign to people) does provide an impediment, but puzzling out how to implement the same functionality with a more familiar syntax would be extremely difficult (though potentially very fun). |
|
Typed functional programming offers wins that forces more safety and modularity onto the code. These are all long term wins. Ultimately I would argue that elm's syntax is better suited for extremely complex projects that have low tolerance for bugs.