[mebassett]

my startup uses elm in production.

There are plenty bugs with the current featureset in the elm compiler. The next version is going to break many things. This puts users of the platform in an awkward position where they have to put up with bugs for an indefinite amount of time, and when a release does come it is going to break a lot of code.

this isn't something I'd expect in a "production ready" language.

frequent patch releases would be ideal. Though the version scheme of elm does not respect semantic versions. Which introduces another problem - unless you're "in the know" about elm, its difficult to even tell that the new release is going to break your code.

[amarshall]

Regardless of whether it claims to adhere to SemVer, Elm hasn’t had a 1.0.0 release yet, and, as such, the following SemVer clause applies:

> Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable.

That said, it’s reasonable to think that Elm should have had a 1.0.0 release by now.

[mebassett]

Apologies, I should have been more clear. I don’t know if elm /claims/ to adhere or not. I only know that in practice it doesn’t.

But thank you, that is an important point; elm’s own version numbers suggest it isn’t ready for production. Use at your own peril.