[dmix]

I see, thanks for the reply.

But you have to admit there is some utility in designing a language from the ground up to target browsers.

I’ve never understood the OCaml and Haskell people’s obsession with creating half baked JS generators that produce less than great web apps. And I completely get the backend guys desire for a proper language when they are forced by their companies to do web stuff. But that cross platform stuff has repeatedly been an unfulfilled pipe dream. Not only JS to mobile but systems/server languages to web.

I’ve been looking for a proper functional and typed replacement to JS for years and Purescript is the only one I’ve seen that is close to being as good as the Vue/React apps I get paid good money to develop for a living. https://lumi.com is a good example of a modern web app being built by the main PS creator.

I’m hoping one of you smart Haskell people solves this problem before I get old having to use JS.

[virtualwhys]

> Purescript is the only one I’ve seen that is close to being as good as the Vue/React apps I get paid good money to develop for a living.

Purescript is a language, are you saying that the language itself allows for creating View/React apps without need of a framework? Or do you mean that there are native (in the ecosystem sense) Purescript UI frameworks that allow one to create View/React apps without depending directly on JS ecosystem to handle the UI?

Wonder how PS compares to OCaml/BuckleScript wrt to generated code size (the latter is absurdly tiny somehow, just incredibly efficient on that front).

[rehemiau]

Is bucklescript half-baked in your opinion? Why?

[scns]

I think parent referred to Ocsigen, which produced a several Mb js payload for a hello world when i played around with it

[dmix]

Yes exactly, among others such as Miso.