Fork me on GitHub
#clojure-boston
<
2015-10-10
>
whacked16:10:30

have not, just did, thanks. Yeah Phil Freeman looks like one of those mostrously productive people

whacked16:10:00

my haskeller friend said purescript syntax actually looks like an improvement on haskell, that's quite something

whacked16:10:24

the rub for me though, is that as a javascript replacement we're still looking for lots of interop

whacked16:10:47

So for side-effectful coding you can certainly say, stick it in a do block and make the rest pure

whacked16:10:03

if you code carefully enough you can also achieve that, and deftest your pure code separately

whacked16:10:06

but in the end when you're FFI-ing against say a game engine, I can't immediately see how this will benefit

whacked16:10:48

so when I was using haxe for dom manipulation and running custom animations, sometimes i got the pixel values off and everything looked bad

whacked16:10:22

and the easiest way for me was to debug that visually after a debug-recompile loop

whacked16:10:46

as fast as haxe compiler was it was still several seconds to see the chage for me

whacked16:10:07

my point is even when you have mostly pure code, I don't have a good sense of how pure code of any kind really helps once you're in DOM land?

whacked16:10:06

in which case the live programming style in cljs has been night and day, plus atoms/react

whacked16:10:37

so the purescript doc doesn't mention live coding, so I can see one doing this "code checks out" but the render is still wrong

henrytill20:10:37

@whacked: well i only suggested it because 1. i've heard that the js output is clean and 2. it has a type checker (which i gather is why you were looking at Flow) (and otherwise it seems to be fairly well regarded in the compile-to-js space)

henrytill20:10:17

but yeah, cljs is definitely really nice in both the interop and live programming depts.