On: Elm at Prezi

[nahname]

Inversion of control is a good thing. Why would you want to avoid it?

[laszlok → nahname]

I think the idea here is that you aren't /forced/ into inversion of control. That is, if it is clearer to write things side by side, instead of separated into another callback function, you can keep them together.

[icarus127 → nahname]

I'm genuinely curious, why do you think inversion of control is an unqualified Good Thing™?

[alipang → icarus127]

Because of certain limitations in Java-style type systems...?

[zeckalpha → nahname]

It's not avoided, it just has a different syntax. (Monadic rather than callbacks, but since they are the same thing...)