upvote
The project was dead. The previous release was 7 years ago, where it stopped because the creator (same as author of this announcement) stopped maintaining it and since the community hasn't progress beyond a BDFL-model that's where it died.

So it was dead, it just now has been resurrected (and AFAIK with a whithered community in the meantime).

reply
your definition of dead is elms definition of stability, I think :D haha

javascriptland really warps peoples minds on stability and project-liveness

reply
> your definition of dead is elms definition of stability

If Elm's definition of stability is keeping bugs and runtime errors for years, then I'm glad I stopped using Elm long ago.

Not only were the issues unaddressed, but for the past years the PR got no human response. For instance this one¹ fixes infinite loops in the core. [¹]: https://github.com/elm/core/pull/1137

reply
You are not entirely wrong, but there’s still a difference between being dead and very stable. Among the languages that compile to JS, I would look at ClojureScript as the prime example of stability rather than Elm. I mean Elm has removed features breaking compat; ClojureScript doesn’t do that.
reply
> I mean Elm has removed features breaking compat

To be fair, Elm hasn't made it to 1.0 (yet). That's where languages should make breaking changes before being stuck with the flaws forever.

reply
... which is totally fine, but that's also why you can hardly call it "stable".
reply
> your definition of dead is elms definition of stability, I think :D haha

The Elm community (or those who remained anyway) has a very cult-like way of spinning the current status quo as being good for you, even if it’s not.

Removing native JavaScript interop in 0.19? They’re just making it more pure! Sorry your project had to become impossible to continue on Elm, but this is the price we pay for a leader with vision.

No appreciable updates or bug fixes for 7 years? That’s just stability! Look how stable and mature it is that it can go 7 years without a release!

reply
Were people forced to use elm prior to a 1.0 release or something? Is Evan being accused of baiting people with a lovely experience and then bailing? I'm not really familiar, so maybe the ball was dropped in some kind of contract I'm not aware of.

If not, the expectations you and many have here seem pretty unreasonable. There's room for projects like Elm. Not every PL has to meet the demands of every single non paying user of the community.

reply
Elm was very heavily evangelized for a while, and people were using it. Had there been a migration path through the breaking changes, it would have been a lot less disruptive.

Even if there had just been incremental bug fixes, I suspect between some and most people would have gotten over it, but seven years of silence is a very long time- long enough for an entire generation of new developers to start calling themselves seniors knowing only that Elm has stalled and shouldn't be used, because the controlling developers are unreliable and prone to giving the appearance of abandoning the language.

reply
I've head the displeasure of working with more than one Elm zealot in the past, and also allowed a service to make it into production (which was a huge disaster). Due to that, I know a lot more about Elm than I'd like to.

I think the "Elm is stable not dead" seen from the few people that stuck around with Elm is largely cope for being stuck with an unmaintained language. Languages, like all other pieces of software need maintenance or they degrade in the world moving around it (e.g. there is/was no official aarch64 build of Elm in the period of non-maintenance).

I also would say that Elm is still largely unfit for most realistic production scenarios, unless you have the manpower to build everything from scratch, as interoperability with the outside web world (JS/TS) is an afterthough, and by some parts of the community not desired.

reply
This, 200 times. No weekly news does not mean dead. In some specific places like this one, it means stable. (And also arguably, for good or bad reasons, why it will never become mainstream).
reply
Not dead, Evan was working on Acadia (elm on db) which is about to be released, to make Elm development and funding more sustentable.
reply
I'm not deeply involved in the community, but I know people who were, and my understanding is the removal of custom infix operators lost a lot of community support. Very popular feature removed specifically because the creator of the language didn't like it, and despite large community cries for it to remain.

In my eyes, it was probably the right decision technically, but deeply unpopular and probably the wrong decision socially.

reply
Not exactly removed, the feature was still there, but could be used only if your module was in Elm namespace (the compiler checked). It was kind of a "no soup for you" situation, which bothered me.

Elm served its purpose for me - an example of a small language with great tooling and error messages. And the strictness was helpful in learning to do things the "proper" way in the Elm model, even if I did reach for escape hatches in later projects. E.g. writing a notion-like application in Elm, I had to walk through my data twice - once to render it and another time to collect cache misses. With hyperapp, I broke purity a little and accumulated the information on the side.

reply
I'm glad it's back. Elm had such a remarkable elegance I was always rooting for it.
reply
Same, I basically assumed the community around it had died out. But i guess the sole maintainer/creator is still around.

I never used elm except for doing a tutorial, but lately I've built a full stack gleam app (using coding agents for the most part, with a lot of control in the beginning on the structure of the code) and have found that process works quite well

reply
I know right. I’m glad DSLs have fallen out of fashion. Just use the platform.
reply
I can understand why developers might not care for DSLs, especially when they force a choice between entirely different toolsets and toolchains.

However, I feel people often miss the real value of a good DSL: it's not about the syntax, but about providing hardened semantics that can bolster or guarantee desired qualities. Elm, for instance, provides value insofar as it makes producing runtime exceptions significantly more difficult.

Personally, I hope languages like Lean, which provides exceptional support for creating DSLs within the language, renew interest in semantically sound DSLs, especially if we insist on using LLMs.

reply
I recently learned about that too, how Lean provides ways to create new language syntax and DSLs, which is (on the surface) similar to Lisps like Racket. It's like operator overloading but way more flexible and general purpose. I'm wary of such language features, convenient for specific purposes (like working with vectors or matrices) but I'm afraid it's too powerful for normal usage, if everyone starts building their own DSLs and syntaxes, it would likely make the typical codebase difficult to read and understand. For example, the C++ template metaprogramming madness, it can be used responsibly but in my opinion it was detrimental to the language ecosystem.
reply
I’ve been using Elm professionally at a very profitable, lean company the last two years. (Didn’t know it coming in, but had enough React, Redux, and other experience to learn quickly.) The Elm community would call this a feature. How much React code you wrote 6-8 years ago will work perfectly and identically with today’s React toolchain?

It’s a whole different set of values. Good React code in 2026 looks like any compiling Elm code since 2016.

reply
Any code you wrote on a React version from 6 years ago will still work the same on that React version today. Let's make that a fair comparison.

I get that some people like stability, but that is quite different from going without updates for 6+ years.

reply
> How much React code you wrote 6-8 years ago will work perfectly and identically with today’s React toolchain?

Today's Elm toolchain is the Elm toolchain of 6 years ago!

reply
Oh yeah, no shade against the language itself. I had fun learning it and using it for some toy development years ago - and the TEA still exists in multiple library implementations. Just wild to see the creator of the language emerge from the fog like that.
reply
wow careful, this turkey still has some kick left in it!
reply