What you’ve said resonates with my experience as well. fwiw there are people applying clojure principles to game development too: http://www.chris-granger.com/2012/12/11/anatomy-of-a-knockout/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW1ie0pIO_E

Good point, it can be applied to games but like this would probably be hard to manage for a modern 3d, console or pc game.

Because of bias I want to say that Elm is practical, but otherwise I like it

@U3JH98J4R interesting, what would make you say Elm is more practical?

Well, unlike Haskell or OCaml, Elm has a singular purpose. It is there to make web apps.

There are no monads/typeclasses/etc (unlike, say purescript which targets the same "runtime")

its ecosystem is geared toward developer experience while writing web apps, not type tomfoolery. (dead code elim, compiler errors with suggestions, auto code formatting, officially supported v-dom stuff)

@U3JH98J4R Perhaps practical vs academic were the wrong labels, what about classical? Practical things can still be built with those languages so in my mind what Elm was built for shouldn’t change that. The distinguishing characteristics are really its use of strong types and strict focus on purity and managing side effects.

I dont think OCaml manages side effects though, but i might be wrong

@U3JH98J4R Oh you’re right, OCaml doesn’t really manage side effects. Hmm… perhaps its my grouping that is just too naive.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gk-rN7HGe_92fdwQSLkomAknIixsgc4JktK31_C8OKM/edit?usp=sharing