[miggol]

So sad to hear that Elm appears to be dead. It really excited me at first but I guess that like many I never made the time to give Elm a serious attempt.

For me, learning Racket was not too hard. The offical learning materials are excellent, although they are also meant for programmers starting from zero. For me that meant that I occasionally skipped over parts I considered "too easy" only to be confronted by my hubris later.

For me, what makes lisps easier than Haskells is that lisps are multi-paradigm. So you can write a more imperative implementation of whatever you're doing right next to the "proper" functional one to get things to click, and also to identify those elusive merits of functional programming.

I wouldn't describe the Racket community as "vibrantly alive", but it's definitely still moving along. And the knowledge is very transferrable to other lisps and schemes. Next on my list is Carp, for example. And if you (choose to) use Emacs you'll reap even more rewards from the knowledge transfer.

[carapace]

Elm isn't dead. It's in that happy place of stability, people are getting things done with it w/o hassle or churn.

I've heard that an Elm-to-native app compiler is in the works somewhere, which IMO is very exciting.

[quickthrower2]

"Elm is dead" means different things to different people. I think what most people mean is they are not adding the features that they want from Elm. Elm has a strong opinionated nature, as well as being very well scoped to the front end and using "TEA" system for rendering, so it may appear that it is dead because there isn't much to update anymore.

People are still working on Elm ecosystem packages, so I think that is evidence that it isn't dead. But it isn't as "alive" (or perhaps... hectic) as the JS ecosystem of course.

[Akronymus]

Maybe elmish could be of interest to you? https://github.com/elmish/elmish