syntax was wrong in your case: Maybe is a type, not a
> value, so you can never use it in a pattern match. You need to match either
> against the constructors (Just, Nothing) or wildcards, or variables.
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Austin B >
> wrote:
>
>> I am tr
I am trying to ensure that three arguments to a function are all not
Nothing.
Right now I have this (below), which works, but uses "withDefault." I want
to avoid this because the default values are meaningless and I want to
clearly and fundamentally avoid any possible situation where a Nothing
I think that would be the case. Although, I'd imagine I'd be using
dictionaries in this situation once I get to the point of having "Maybe"
data in this particular example.
I am beginning to understand the value of flattening data structures in
this context.
On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:0
Hi all, I really appreciate the ample feedback.
As I am new to the functional style, Sergey, your input is extremely
helpful. For some reason, I felt like I was supposed to have all my
modifiers and data structure definitions in one place, which became
unmanageable. I am currently refactoring t
Hi,
I come from an OOP background and trying to make the leap to keeping all
state in a single immutable data store, which has shown to be amazing as
long as the system is small, but I am having trouble scaling up to anything
beyond a toy app.
One big challenge is trying to update nested field
Oh nice, okay. thank you.
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 2:43:36 PM UTC-7, Janis Voigtländer wrote:
>
> Known issue: https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/635.
>
> Am Samstag, 30. Juli 2016 schrieb Austin Baltes :
>
>> Hi, I'm working on building a scatterPlot module for one of my Elm
>>