I'd say Elm is a mix of ML and Haskell (which is itself ML inspired)
ML:
: for type signatures
:: for cons
Strict evaluation
No typeclasses
(extensible) Records
Let-expressions instead of where statements
Haskell:
no mutable variables
Left to right notation for type constructors ("List a" instead
Brilliant. When I was a student 20 years ago they made us learn ML and I
used it for all my coursework, standard ML for my undergrad thesis and
OCaml for my masters. I think I am going to like Elm a lot.
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 3:29:51 PM UTC+1, Janis Voigtländer wrote:
>
> Yes. Mainly thr
Yes. Mainly through the ML "dialect" OCaml.
> Am 30.07.2016 um 11:39 schrieb 'Rupert Smith' via Elm Discuss
> :
>
> Just looking at Elm for the first time, and have not really sunk my teeth
> into it. I notice that its syntax and type system slightly resemble ML, has
> the language ML been an
Just looking at Elm for the first time, and have not really sunk my teeth
into it. I notice that its syntax and type system slightly resemble ML, has
the language ML been an influence on Elm?
Rupert
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm
Discuss" gro
