package.elm-lang.org VS proposal-pattern-matching

Also the fact that their package manager is strongly coupled against https://package.elm-lang.org/. There is no way to override it. This means that if that package site ever goes down, you will be left with an unbuildable project. Seems pretty risky to me.

Imagine, for example, you have a component library that you don't want to publish to the public package.elm-lang.org. How do you make that available just within your company?

Not to be silly but I was getting ready to do my port & all but clicking on "source" from with package.elm-lang.org takes me to elm-charts, not elm-plot.

Elm has packages prefaced with the repo owner, so its mdgriffith/elm-ui and not just "elm-ui".

If you're dealing with some kind of currency it's better to use a Decimal type which has few packages on the ecosystem.

If you are looking for a complete API documentation you should be browsing https://package.elm-lang.org/ ; I still find it lacking compared to other programming languages, but it's definitely more complete that the starting guide.

There are two ways of structuring state. Record with each page's state in its own field OR a custom type with the variants containing the state for the page (this is what you see in elm-spa-example or package.elm-lang.org). The tabs you describe behave like the first approach.

Elm is a strongly typed functional language, compiler, package manager, and framework. You write in the Elm language, and it compiles to JavaScript for use in the browser. The Elm compiler has 2 basic modes of development, and production. It optionally has a REPL if you want to test some basic code. The package manager uses it’s own website and structure using elm.json, instead of package.json. The framework is what Elm is most known for, and was the inspiration for Redux.

I was considering doing just that, using nginx server. I was using Evan's git repo for Elm packages (website: https://package.elm-lang.org/) (git: https://github.com/elm/package.elm-lang.org ) where he does uses that. So I think I will try this first and then consider deploying the binary if I can. Thanks for the advice!

Note, however, that there is a proposal to add pattern matching to JS.

There's an ECMAScript proposal that is in the works to add this feature to the language! It's going to look something like this.

More importantly, TypeScript typically commits to build things into itself when the proposal in JavaScript reaches Stage 3. The pattern matching proposal in JavaScript is Stage 1, but depends on many other proposals as well that may or may not need to be at Stage 3 as well for it to work. This particular proposal is interested on pattern matching on JavaScript Objects and other primitives, just like Python does with it’s native primitives. These are also dynamic types which helps in some areas, but makes it harder than others. Additionally, the JavaScript type annotations proposal needs to possibly account for this. So it’s going to be awhile. Like many years.

For true™ functional programming in JS, native pattern matching and partial function application are missing (at least for now: 1, 2). For proper OOP, it lacks real interfaces and compile-time dependency injection.

The proposal for pattern matching syntax seems more akin to what they're looking for.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching

There's a proposal to add something like that to JavaScript but it's been stuck in limbo since 2017 although there are libraries like ts-pattern which implement it already.

I'll admit, it is easy to assert that the TypeScript language should not be involved in the matters of packages but I also wonder if we're moving towards a point where interfaces will be as common as namespaces and whether or not it would be sensible for the language to incorporate such type assertions into the language formally, after all, it already compiles to various forms of JavaScript and there is a stage 1 proposal submitted to the TC39 committee to give JavaScript pattern matching. If adopted, wouldn't it make sense to allow TypeScript to compile a type into a type guard for the native JavaScript pattern matcher?

Both are active tc39 proposals :)

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator - Stage 2

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching - Stage 1

Hopefully we get both in the next couple of years.

We often add promising TC39 proposals into Civet so people can experiment without waiting.

We've added https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pattern-matching, a variant of https://github.com/tc39/proposal-string-dedent and others.

Since our goal is to be 99% compatible with ES we'll need to accommodate any proposals that become standard and pick up anything TC39 leaves on the table (rest parameters in any position, etc.)