Simon Marechal

I am looking a bit into this. It is fairly easy to have the proper type definition, but for serialization code the current infrastructure is a bit lacking. You will...

This will not compile either: type Id a = Id Int type alias Foo = { fooId : Id Foo , fooName : String } Fails with: This type alias...

Or just fix the newtype so that it produces a proper type declaration, as recursive stuff is perhaps an edge use case?

I will try something that works like @ChShersh 's fix then. There is no downside to it as the current (released) version crashes and the current (master) version produces invalid...

I did not forget about this, I am just really busy with other things right now.

The problem of this library is that it is currently not well supported, but the point is that you can derive your code with the aeson options you like and...

The `newtype` idiom is supported, in a clumsy way, as described [here](https://hackage.haskell.org/package/elm-bridge-0.5.0/docs/Elm-Module.html#v:newtypeAliases). The reason it is not done by default is that I liked it better that way :) Not...

There is the [Date](http://package.elm-lang.org/packages/elm-lang/core/latest/Date) datatype. If the types do not have a `ToJson` instance, this would be real problematic to handle properly, and if they have, the best course of...

Specific examples are all the "built-in" datatypes. You might want to check [the default alterations](https://github.com/agrafix/elm-bridge/blob/2704e5a9f5d004e98bf6414a16334650ac08f458/src/Elm/Module.hs#L106). You then use the `*WithAlterations` functions and stack your own modifications by composing your own...

Yup! You can also do something like this, if you do not want to explicitly reference `defaultAlterations` in your own function: ``` makeElmModuleWithAlterations (myalterations . defaultAlterations) ```