Back to Questions
811
views8
comments
Can you consider direct support for the PureScript | Elm | WebComponents?
websharperelmwebcomponentspurescript

Hello,

It is possible to add suport for directly interacting with languages like PureScript, Elm and also being able to use web componenets (http://webcomponents.org/) straight out of the box.

Suminda

.

Maybe you can borrow some of the good parts from the languages into W#.

Also better woud be a easier and more consize way to roll out your own extentions with perhaps automatic bindins if possible. Then you do noth have to have extentiona at all.

By on 9/9/2015 5:02 AM ()

The thing is in some cases it's very hard to figure out the adequate types for a JavaScript library even when doing it by hand. I don't think it would be plausible or even possible to do anything non-trivial when binding extensions automatically. We have some tools to generate extensions from JSON or XML descriptions, TypeScript definitions but at the end of the day they don't really map well to F#. Sure you can use them all right but they still feel like JavaScript here and there. To write a good extension you have to put serious effort into it if you'd like it to be easy to use.

Obviously where types are available like in Elm or PureScript we could generate the appropriate interfaces much easier but I don't see many scenarios where this would be very useful. You usually don't want to mix languages like that. Our main targets are JS libraries and there it's just not possible to generate decent bindings.

By on 9/9/2015 5:26 AM ()

I certainly wouldn't rule out interoperability with other languages, but as Istvan points out there are more to consider to get the full picture. Suminda, do you have a use case in mind that you would like supported?

By on 9/9/2015 7:54 AM ()

The architecture framework of Elm is very user friendly and easy to use, but down side is you have to deal with JS as the libraries are in JS. I am looking for one framework across the board. Perhaps you can have a similar model borrowing from Elm and also PureScript and and have a wizard to generate all the code for JS integration which you have to fill in the types. Maybe you can use something like Flow (http://flowtype.org/) to infer type information to fill in parts. The remaining types you have to fill in.

By on 9/9/2015 11:05 PM ()

Also MVVM/MVC programming with FRP like in Elm.

By on 9/10/2015 12:47 AM ()

You should look at WebSharper UI.Next, it gives you equally powerful FRP abstractions, typed reactive templating, reactive formlets and piglets, and it works with every single extension we have for WebSharper (plus you can write your own easily).

By on 9/10/2015 4:11 AM ()

Basically a binding generator with much of the types infered perhaps using another tool.

By on 9/10/2015 12:46 AM ()

Interfacing with PureScript or Elm heavily depends on the generated code. I'm not at all familiar with the output of either language but a quick Google shows that neither of them have a really good story of interfacing with JavaScript the other way around (e.g. calling code written in Elm from JavaScript), which is absolutely understandable if that wasn't a goal when designing the languages. Because of this calling PureScript or Elm code would quite a big hassle in my opinion but not impossible. You would have to use WIG or manual bindings to call into the generated code, which is extremely fragile.

I might have misunderstood the question but as I can see web components is a set of polyfills so you just have to include the js file and it will do the heavy lifting by itself. So you would have to include the resource with the resource management system.

By on 9/9/2015 2:17 AM ()

    Topic tags

    IntelliFactory Offices Copyright (c) 2011-2012 IntelliFactory. All rights reserved.
    Home | Products | Consulting | Trainings | Blogs | Jobs | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy     		Built with WebSharper