[StreamBright]

Well sure, but as an architect/CTO I do not care about trendy, I care only about properly working, easy to develop and maintain and wildly used so I can hire for. Elm is none of these at the moment, but React is.

[rtfeldman]

Properly working, check.

Easy to develop and maintain, big check.

Widely used so you can hire - it's usually easier to hire Elm developers because there are more people who want to use it than jobs hiring for it. The opposite is true for JS. So...better than check, at least for right now! :)

Here is a CTO giving a talk about his company's experiences with Elm:

"Elm from a business perspective" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvQI1KntMhk

[hellofunk]

The most common stance on hiring Elm developers is to not look for people with experience with Elm (because there are relatively few) but people who are smart and willing to learn it. It is a different way than for hiring in other languages.

For example:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/elm-discuss/92dXqmB4nJ...

But this is common in niche languages. Most of my background is in Clojure, which has a vastly larger userbase than Elm, but it can still be very difficult to find good developers for it. Many of the professional Clojure developers I know learned the language on the job when they went to work for a company that used it. I wouldn't doubt it is similar with Elm. I saw a presentation once by a CTO of a company that started using Elm in production, and he mentioned that hiring is one of the larger risks to adopting it. But that shouldn't necessarily stop anyone, depends on a company's goals (and spirit).

[Albert_Camus]

> I care only about properly working, easy to develop and maintain and wildly used so I can hire for. Elm is none of these at the moment, but React is.

As a CTO and the author of the OP, I can say with confidence this statement is false. Elm works correctly, is easy to develop in, and is easy to train developers that have experience in other languages to write Elm.