Cycle.js VS Elm

Seems like you might be interested in this

Cycle

This is the standard way of going about things in Mithril and Cycle. Elm as well doesn't use an XML knockoff for view code- and as a fun fact, the original version of React didn't either.

For example, an FRP framework (created by the same author who later wrote the callbag spec): https://cycle.js.org/

TypeScript is relatively mainstream at this point, and I think that's good news. If you want to crank the type-safety and pure FP dials on it to 11, you certainly can do that. I have a project that I've based largely on this post, including the "hardcore" section. However, instead of Redux and otherwise plain React, I've chosen to use Cycle.js and the lessons from this post to use React in a very purely Functional Reactive Programming Way.

This post links to a PureScript project that is probably the easiest PS framework around.

ReScript + rescript-react is a good alternative. Less safe, waaaay more verbose; but backed by Facebook.

This is quite cute (in TypeScript though): https://github.com/cyclejs/cyclejs

And Yew is super cool, it goes the WASM route (in Rust): https://github.com/yewstack/yew

From now on I was on what I would call a typical open source trajectory. I used the Cycle.js framework to rewrite my frontend and in that process I hit some walls. I eventually figured that the error was on my side and that I was just missing some information to avoid the error. To spare others the hours of debugging I started to contribute small patches to the documentation. At the same time I also found some missing features that I voiced in GitHub issues.

Elm [1] is based on a similar idea. Build your app from pure functions that return HTML tags.

[1] https://elm-lang.org/

You also wouldn't really be creating your own new programing language. You would be creating something that can run JavaScript by following JavaScript standards and syntax. You might be able to add some non-standard features of your own on top of those standards, or include your own standard library of helpers or utilities, but you can't completely make a new or alternative language and then load it in the browser (or at least not by reimplementing ECMAScript standards... you actually can make your own language that runs within any Javascript enviroment, if you provide an interpreter or compiler that transforms it into valid JS. Some people have done something like this, eg Elm: https://elm-lang.org/).

You should at least have a look at https://elm-lang.org/ it is a pure functional language like Haskell (although with fewer fancy syntax/type classes) but it has some lovely libraries for visualisation and even with plain elm (+ elm-ui) doing string transformations can be easily done.

I get it. However, the whole point of using Unions to narrow your types, ensure only a set of possible scenarios can occur, and only access data of a particular union when it’s safe to do so. That’s some of what pattern matching can provide, and 100% of what using switch statements in TypeScript with their Discriminated Unions can provide. Yes, it’s not 100% exhaustive, but TypeScript is not soundly typed, and even Elm which is still has the same issue TypeScript does: You’re running in JavaScript where anything is possible. So it’s good enough to build with and much better than what you had.

The beauty of a language like Elm (and other lambda-calculus / functional programming inspired languages) is that there's very little transformation involved in going from an idea to code. And that seems to have a big impact on getting things done.

I think the most fun and approachable way for beginners to build games with functional programming is with Elm [1].

See a few (small, demo) games built by the community in [2] .

Notice Elm has abandoned the FRP approach in favor of Model-View-Update [3].

[1] https://elm-lang.org/