purerl VS js-framework-benchmark

I will put in a good word for PureScript for the beam with `purerl`. It's my go-to for writing BEAM code nowadays. Notably PureScript tooling including LSP, package management, etc., just works, so you are able to just get to work in internalizing the way OTP and other Erlangy things are expressed in a statically typed, pure language.

https://github.com/purerl/purerl & https://purerl-cookbook.readthedocs.io/ for more information. Join the PureScript discord and the #purerl channel if you want help.

purerl is a compiler for turning PureScript code into Erlang code, so that you're able to write BEAM (the Erlang virtual machine) applications using it.

You've been able to write PureScript that compiles to Erlang and has perfect interop for years, via `purerl`[0]. Using it with Elixir is as simple as adding `purerlex` as a compiler and having your PureScript code automatically compile when `mix` compiles things, and off you go.

In terms of the typing itself, it's exactly what you get in all of PureScript, strict static typing with no `any` or the like. Using `Pinto`, the de facto OTP layer in PureScript your processes are typed, i.e. their `info` messages & state are typed, which means that they are all much more like strongly typed state machines than anything else.

You can see an example of a basic `gen_server` here:

https://pastebin.com/UTEfz7Wg

The differences aren't very big in terms of what you'd expect to be doing. One small thing to note is that the `GenServer.call` expects a closure to be passed instead of having the split between `gen_server:call` & `handle_call`, removing the need for synchronizing two places for your messages being sent and handled.

0 - https://github.com/purerl/purerl

JavaScript benchmarks are instruments for measuring the speed and effectiveness with which a JavaScript engine—such as the ones found in web browsers—can complete particular tasks. Benchmarks are used by developers and browser vendors to evaluate various engines, find places in the code where improvements are needed, and make sure JavaScript standards are being followed.

Strange then that frameworks advertise how fast they are at rendering, mutating, and creating objects in the DOM, and one of the main JS benchmarks everyone likes to measure their performance by is literally a benchmark about DOM manipulation: https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark

Oh wait. It's not strange. Because state manipulation is a largely solved problem, and even the least performant state manipulation is blazingly fast. However, presenting components in the browser's DOM is tens of magnitudes of orders less performant than anything you can throw at state manipulation.

And every single framework is busy solving one single problem: how do we touch the DOM as little as possible?

It literally says at the bottom "Data from https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/"

The standard benchmark for js frameworks would be best: https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark