[carapace]

So, is that a claim you're seriously making about Evan?

- - - -

Not to be arch, but this whole line of discussion is uninteresting to me. I'm glad to discuss Elm, but I don't want to hear unfounded character assassination of a kid who's only guilty of being willing to say "no" to people who want to change his language in ways that he's not into.

From my POV Elm stands as a serious challenge to the entire JS ecosystem. I keep asking, "What's the business value argument for not using Elm?" and no one has a good answer.

[xtian]

The crucial point is exactly what you're referencing ("his language"). The way that contributions, feedback, and issues were treated was very much not in line with a tool that people depend on for their work. It was in line with a personal hobby project, but the marketing and promotion did not set those expectations. They strongly promoted the project as a tool for use in industry. So your defense is not convincing to me as someone who did try to use this tool in a professional setting where I was accountable to a larger organization for delivering on technical requirements.

People weren't asking to compromise or control the design of the language. They wanted to be able to contribute to the project (usually just first-party packages) in order to have their problems solved in a timely manner or have their issues addressed in some other way. This was usually after having invested hundreds of hours in the language, because the basic golden path was very polished in Elm.

I can only speculate on the reasons why there was this disparity between marketing and reality. Certainly the language gained a lot more interest and community investment than a Show HN hobby project, and some people did benefit from that. I'm not making any specific claims about Evan. The "nice" aspect is relevant because while following the Elm community closely, I witnessed many harsh interactions on the part of Evan and Richard Feldman that were simply wrapped in gentle verbiage.

Here's just one example (check the edit history): https://github.com/gdotdesign/elm-github-install/issues/62#i...

[carapace]

So what I'm not hearing is that Elm didn't work. It worked, right?

Evan and co. just wouldn't agree to let you contribute to solve your problems and issues in the way you would have preferred?

(In re: the "harsh" comment you linked to, I don't know what to tell you. It doesn't read as "harsh" to me, if anything it shows admirable restraint. In any event, I'm not interested in "tone policing" Richard Feldman. I know nothing about him.)

- - - -

I'm one of those people who are like, if you don't like what Evan's doing just write your own, eh?

Meaning no disrespect to Evan and co. and what they've achieved, it's not that hard. It just isn't. Elm-style languages are pretty easy to implement (that's kind of the whole point, yeah?)

It divides the complainers into two groups: those who can write their own but instead prefer to leverage Elm devs via what amounts to various forms of emotional and reputational blackmail; and those who can't but still want to leverage Elm devs via what amounts to various forms of emotional and reputational blackmail. Either way, I personally feel comfortable dismissing their complaints without further consideration.

- - - -

Do you have any technical complaints about Elm? Did it ever break in production? What was the most interesting bug you encountered using Elm? That's the discussion I'd like to have.

[xtian]

Why are you interested in having a discussion on any of this when you can just talk to yourself (i.e., write your own)? It’s really not that hard.

Yes, Elm and its core packages had bugs and critical omissions that were outstanding for years, many of which affected our app. It was a running joke on our team to try to guess the vintage of the extant GitHub issue whenever we ran into a problem. I consciously fled the ecosystem and community many years ago so I don’t remember specifics anymore. And the repos were scrubbed of all past issues when 0.19 was released so we can’t go check either.

If you appreciate implied threats for creating a package which gives people some (unauthorized!) control over their own destiny, then I can see why this comment wouldn’t trouble you. Have fun in the sandbox.

[carapace]

> Why are you interested in having a discussion on any of this...

I'm interested in systems which permit bug-free programming. Elm seems like a step in the right direction, bringing semi-obscure ideas closer to the mainstream. Lot of JS programmers got some exposure to Elm-like FP.

> you can just talk to yourself

I mostly do. (I'm a recluse, this account on HN is my primary channel of communication to the outside world.)

> (i.e., write your own)? It’s really not that hard.

I am writing my own system, and it's really not that hard.

> Yes, Elm and its core packages had bugs and critical omissions that were outstanding for years, many of which affected our app.

That sucks. But really, without any details your vague memories aren't much to go on.

> appreciate implied threats

I'm not sure what you mean, maybe I misread the message. It didn't sound to me like anyone was threatening anyone.

> Have fun in the sandbox.

Thanks! I will.

[hitekker]

This is starting to sound unhinged. You're identifying strongly with Evan but you're also denying how deeply he matters to you. That seems mentally unhealthy.

Are you ok?

[carapace]

Are you? You're making drive-by psychological diagnosis on the Internet. Maybe rethink your rhetorical style?

It's uncool to troll like that. This is a two-day old thread. Were you just hanging around waiting for me to respond so you could troll?

[hitekker]

I think anyone can see something is wrong upstairs, man. If that sounds like trolling, I'm sorry. It sucks that HN is your only contact with the real world and I hope you can find something to worship besides Elm/Evan.

[59nadir]

> What's the business value argument for not using Elm?

The time and energy investment into using any JS code in Elm for things not currently sorted out is severely disproportional to the value provided by Elm. The ROI is just not there. If you compare it to the FFI layer of PureScript, there is no question that it's nice to have validation, etc., but it's just not worth it.

The very restrictive view of packages (where to get them, what you can upload and use, etc.) is also a very obvious deal breaker.

I would be surprised that you find these two things that everyone keeps bringing up not to be good answers to your question, but then I remember how being in the Elm community felt like: "Everything Evan says or thinks we all think". It's the same culty feel that Elixir has a lighter version of.

[satvikpendem]

> "What's the business value argument for not using Elm?"

The ecosystem of Javascript is vast, in comparison to Elm, which can save time and money (especially now that apparently Elm doesn't allow JS code). JS devs are likely also cheaper than Elm devs due to the high supply. Just two reasons why I as a business owner would still write in Javascript/TypeScript over Elm.

[oxnrtr]

> From my POV Elm stands as a serious challenge to the entire JS ecosystem.

Lol, OK. Spoken like a cultist. Bad news for you: It's not going to happen.