Sorry, I didn't mean es6 module, I meant map one ocaml (or elm) module to one runnable js module(amdjs, commonjs, or es6) so you get separate compilation.
This is just my observation , please take it with a grain of salt: in general, it takes 20ms-80ms for BuckleScript to compile a single file, but that's almost all you need for BuckleScript dev feedback loop, in elm, it's different, you need recompile that module and regenerate a monolithic js file, the larger project it gets , the worse compilation time you get in elm mode. If you have experience in C++, you know the bottle neck used to be linking, it is quite common for a c++ project to spend 20minutes in linking. I don't how much elm is performance engineered, but we are very sensitive about performance even in nanoseconds level ( https://github.com/bloomberg/bucklescript/pull/1082), this little engineering will add up On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 9:23 PM GordonBGood <gordonbg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, 16 January 2017 02:54:17 UTC+7, Bob Zhang wrote: > > Hi Gordon, > > It is not uncommon to see 100 times slowness when building Elm vs OCaml in > incremental build (dev time), the reason is that Elm (correct me if I am > wrong) always need a link time, so whenever your change a file, it will > trigger the linker, this will get significantly worse if your project is in > not small. While BuckleScript compiles one OCaml module to one ES6 module, > it does not need link during dev time, best for incremental build. > > > Hi Hongbo, that was interesting, especially in what you way about why Elm > may compile very much slower then OCaml. If the difference is just link > time (which linking for all makes it inherits from haskell) then this is > surely fixable? Can't Elm do the same as BucketScript - compile to ES6 > modules? > > In fact, I don't see why the insistence that these JS compiler languages > compile to ES5 at all: it made sense in 2012 with the Elm project was > started, but now all mainline browsers and platforms have been updated to > near 100% ES6 compatibility. Or do the compilers such as Elm want to > continue to support Internet Explorer (which will never be updated) forever? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elm-discuss/Um7WIBTq9xU/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
