reflex VS klister

There's other people around here who would like to know your opinion about these GUI frameworks! I haven't written a GUI in Rust personally, but my favorite GUI framework is not at all OOP: https://reflex-frp.org/

Not to be confused with Reflex, allowing web apps in pure Haskell: https://reflex-frp.org/

FRP solutions sound very attractive. But reflex seems to be stuck on the outdated GHCJS, and I haven't been able to get it to build. The newer JS output in GHC doesn't yet have DOM support. And even if I used one of those, figuring out how to interact with a LaTeX renderer might be tricky.

I only have experience using Reflex, which I regard as the main contender for FRP UI libraries in the Haskell sphere. It's got a flashy website, but I think the documentation is a bit disorganized -- it took a long time for me to figure out how to get going with the library (you find some pieces of knowledge scattered here and there, if you look hard enough). My plan was to learn it well enough to onboard other people, but I don't think I could convince anyone who hasn't already decided that they're gonna make UIs in Haskell no matter the required effort.

Once someone has spent a bunch of time with Haskell and sees the value, they will find Nix if it makes sense. Maybe they'll want to play with https://reflex-frp.org, or they'll discover they want a better way to package 3rd-party dependencies, or they start using NixOS and want to nix all the things, etc. etc. Or, maybe they'll never find a use for it, and that's okay.

Reflex natively supports iOS, along with Android, desktop and web. I would recommend it for functional reactive programming in Haskell: https://reflex-frp.org

It's been awhile since I've tried to get into Ubuntu Touch/Linux mobile development in earnest. I'm currently working on an app using the reflex framework that I hope to eventually target Android, iOS, Desktop, and Linux Mobile.

If you're talking about the current Elm approach, I'm not sure. Otherwise, the paper I linked to notes some of the FRP libraries that existed at the time, some of which are still supported today (like reactive-banana), and otherwise I'd suggest looking at reflex, mentioned in the first post in this thread. I don't think it existed at the time the Elm paper came out.

Yeah, that project is pretty much at the bottom of my list, unfortunately. My top projects these days are mgmt, klister, recursion-schemes, and hint... And that's already too much!

case is a special form, ie a bit of core syntax, but, interestingly, data is not. (It is presumably a macro; typechecking is actually done as a part of macro expansion.) The syntax remains pretty uniform. Or, in Klister, type ascription is done via normal S-expression syntax with a form called the, as (the $type $expression); again, the syntax is uniform.

Shameless plug: we don't have that problem in Klister, because our equivalent to main is a run macro which runs an IO action, and your alternate prelude can define its own run macro which expects an IO action from your alternate prelude.

Klister is very similar to Hackett, but implemented in Haskell instead of Racket, and my most recent PR is from 20 days ago, if that's the metric which counts for you. Still very much of a WIP though.

You might be interested in Klister: https://github.com/gelisam/klister

I've now also found an implementation for klister, which is meant to interleave type checking with macro expansion.

In Klister, which already has Scheme-like macros and Haskell-like types (polymorphism, algebraic types and higher-kinded types, but not yet fancier types like RankNTypes and GADTs), our plan to get the best of both worlds (lexical syntax and typed ASTs) is to separate parsing from macro evaluation. That is, users write their programs using the surface syntax of s-expressions, parsers parse those into typed ASTs, and macros are typed by the type of the ASTs they receive as input and produce as output. At this stage this is only a research idea, I don't know if that's going to work out yet, but I hope so!