Straight forward functional programming offers all those benefits and is more accessible.
Brian Di Palma

But it does not try to criticise nor undermine it here. It is just a statement that Elm is moving towards pure functional programming. For me purity conflicts with usefulness, as useful languages operate through massive side effects (a lot of I/O). This is why for instance Clojure is more useful than Haskell, because its impure by nature. The conflict of usefulness vs uselessness can be described best by one of the better programmers Erik Meijer and Simon Peyton Jones (the creator of Haskell, that Elm draws inspiration from):

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.