[ravloony]

This is one of the reasons why I chose Purescript for my team's projects. Also it's got a more complete type system, a simpler FFI, and compiles to less javascript.

This is not to say that Elm is bad. O think it's great as a path into FP, and in fact _was_ my path in. But it does limit you in what you can do and learn.

Also, Purescript has this interesting property of being hard to learn (because it is powerful), but dead simple to use (because it compiles to JS). So you only really get stuck on figuring out how to do things in PS, as opposed to how to get PS working, and therefore every time you get unstuck, you have leveled up. So it's hard, but rewarding.

I'm probably off topic by now, but I do think that Purescript in the frontend is a better option for solid application development.

[eweise]

Purescript looks like a great language and if you want to dive into the deep end of typed FP, then it looks like an excellent choice. One reason I went with Elm for our in-house customer support app, was because of the simplicity of the language. It does result in more boilerplate but I don't think the project would have been successful if the learning curve was steeper.