search

elmbridge / curriculum

Curriculum for Elmbridge
https://elmbridge.github.io/curriculum/
66 stars 14 forks source link

Say a bit more about union types #91

Closed siruguri closed 6 years ago

siruguri commented 7 years ago

I think union types are important/interesting enough to merit a bit more of an explanation in the initial sections, even if students aren't going to use it right away.

I'll submit a PR with my proposed text edits shortly.

raorao commented 7 years ago

I am not convinced that we need another section explaining union types, especially as a part of a section attempting to explain the elm architecture, which is much more vital for students to learn.

If you feel that the current text raises more questions than it answers, I think there are three ways forward:

siruguri commented 7 years ago

I can't do it tonight but I agree that reducing the text in the architecture section and linking to a fuller explanation elsewhere, makes sense... I'd be happy to get around to it in the (near) future.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Srinivas Rao notifications@github.com wrote:

I am not convinced that we need another section explaining union types, especially as a part of a section attempting to explain the elm architecture, which is much more vital for students to learn.

If you feel that the current text raises more questions than it answers, I think there are three ways forward:

  • reduce or remove the current text to hand-wave past union types entirely.
  • add more text to the union type section later in the curriculum.
  • add a bonus example in the morning explaining union types (functionally resolving #27 https://github.com/elmbridge/curriculum/issues/27, and link backwards.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/elmbridge/curriculum/issues/91#issuecomment-255472355, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACezWXEMKAxinqD7Nzit1BdZyERYNyZks5q2TG5gaJpZM4KcaeI .

brookeangel commented 6 years ago

Closing this issue. The text surrounding union types has been slightly modified since this issue was created, and has been given the 👍. Feel free to create a new issue if you have additional suggestions!