Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Haskell for Mac

haskellformac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 185 posts

Re: Haskell for Mac

#121

Post by eropple »

efnx wrote: post #92
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All that static typing shoud lead to an awesome IDE experience. Given that this hasn't happened, I wonder if there isn't something wrong with Haskell's design that works against it?

I think it's just that - the type system gives you so much, most hackers see a text editor with minimal type checking as good enough. Also IDEs tend to be commercial and I don't think any of the big companies see Haskellers as a good chunk of change. There's also quite a stigma many developers carry around regarding Haskell, though I don't understand that.

I don't think there's stigma around Haskell, aside from maybe complexity. I think there often is around Haskell programmers; there's a rep for jerkishness. (Both are commonly attributed to Scala as well, though I think, as a Scala person, the rep for jerkishness is much more earned in Scala-land.)

Re: Haskell for Mac

#122

Post by JadeNB »

I imagine that this is a naïve question, but it's sincere: what does this app offer for its $20 cost that the Haskell platform doesn't? Of their five big selling points, three don't seem really convincing: it mentions that it includes 200 libraries—more than HP, but not the sort of thing one needs to pay for; there is SpriteKit support, of which they say:

> We will release the SpriteKit binding under a permissive open source license for general use as soon as possible.

; and "Let the type system help you", which, of course, is just a feature of Haskell, not of this environment.

A drag'n'drop project manager is nice, but doesn't seem like that big a deal; so I guess that the real selling point is the "Immediate feedback". Indeed, that seems to be a huge selling point, and it's something for which I've often wished while coding Haskell. However, their blurb on it is very brief:

> Haskell playgrounds provide instant feedback, displaying types and results of computations, both textual and graphical.

Is there any way to read more about this, and, in particular, to evaluate how much value it adds before buying?

Re: Haskell for Mac

#123

Post by rubiquity »

gamache wrote: post #28

As required by the Mac App Store, Haskell for Mac is sandboxed. Consequently, Haskell code executed in a Haskell for Mac playground cannot access any data except for Haskell for Mac documents, the app container, and those system files white-listed by the operating system. Any attempt to access other files or to initiate a network connection will be rejected by the operating system. This seems unnecessarily crippling.…

It sounds like this app needs a monad for interacting with the host file system and network.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#124

Post by 59nadir »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #82
theCodeStig wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a full blown IDE (ala IntelliJ) really necessary for Haskell?

All that static typing shoud lead to an awesome IDE experience. Given that this hasn't happened, I wonder if there isn't something wrong with Haskell's design that works against it?

This sort of assumes that the objective of a language should be to create "an awesome IDE experience", while there's a good chunk of people who think having to have an IDE is simply a flaw in a language.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#125

Post by JadeNB »

jkyle wrote: post #80
15155 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet. First it was a setting in the preference panel, preventing you from installing non-MAS apps without disabling it. Next it's the upcoming rootless OS X, System Integrity Protection: it's only a matter of time until the ability to install non-MAS apps is completely removed, buried, or hidden in Recovery mode (as the SIP setting is) I suspect this will happen within the next one or two major versions of OS X.

> First it was a setting in the preference panel, preventing you from installing non-MAS apps without disabling it. Pretty sure the default is MAS + Signed Apps. This setting also doesn't actually stop you from installing a non-signed app. You just have to right click and select open to bypass the warning. I actually keep this enabled so I know if an app isn't signed. So installing non-signed apps is a conscious deci…

> You just have to right click and select open to bypass the warning.

I think that you also need an admin password, which can be an issue for users who don't control their machines. (My work distributes Macs with users configured to be admins, but on Windows machines only allows standard users, so I assume that it's only a matter of time until they change policies and this bites me.)

Re: Haskell for Mac

#126

Post by gohrt »

gamache wrote: post #28

As required by the Mac App Store, Haskell for Mac is sandboxed. Consequently, Haskell code executed in a Haskell for Mac playground cannot access any data except for Haskell for Mac documents, the app container, and those system files white-listed by the operating system. Any attempt to access other files or to initiate a network connection will be rejected by the operating system. This seems unnecessarily crippling.…

MAS apps are banned from accessing the Internet?!

Re: Haskell for Mac

#127

Post by gohrt »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #82
theCodeStig wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a full blown IDE (ala IntelliJ) really necessary for Haskell?

All that static typing shoud lead to an awesome IDE experience. Given that this hasn't happened, I wonder if there isn't something wrong with Haskell's design that works against it?

EclipeFP exists.

The main problem is that there aren't good ways for Haskell analyzers to communicate with a Java/C++ UI in memory. So you get clunky+slow network/IPC APIs (or worse, communication via filesystem) for stuff that ought to be tiny in-process method calls.

And writing the whole UI in Haskell is...not Haskell's strength area.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#128

Post by gohrt »

tonylxc wrote: post #9
coldtea wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cant I replicate all of the features it has with off the shelf tools/editors that are free? You obviously get the convenience of NOT having to replicate all these, and the guaranteed experience of those parts working together as soon as you install it, and with a nice GUI at that.

Sounds good but still not convincing. For example, R can do the same thing, too, or even better. And it can be integrated with other programming languages. I would never buy it either until somebody really shows it's worth the money.

R cannot compile Haskell code.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#129

Post by hundchenkatze »

kyllo wrote: post #61
gamache wrote: post #28

As required by the Mac App Store, Haskell for Mac is sandboxed. Consequently, Haskell code executed in a Haskell for Mac playground cannot access any data except for Haskell for Mac documents, the app container, and those system files white-listed by the operating system. Any attempt to access other files or to initiate a network connection will be rejected by the operating system. This seems unnecessarily crippling.…

Wait, this is a desktop app? Wow... based on the sandboxing thing I had assumed it was an iOS app for learning Haskell on your iPad or something.

How? The title clearly states Haskell for Mac. The site's host is even http://haskellformac.com, and there's no mention of iOS on the home page.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#130

Post by dasil003 »

feelix wrote: post #43
zoul wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it’s required. Only some apps are exempt from sandboxing because they existed before sandboxing was introduced. You can also reach out of the sandbox through some user actions, for example opening a file using the system file picker gives you permissions to access this file. Yes, it’s a big constraint. For some apps it’s a show-stopper. As user I mostly welcome it because of the additional protection it gets me.

Apart from that it doesn't get you any additional protection whatsoever. With all the root OS X exploits floating around that bust you out of the sandbox as well as giving you full system access, as someone that has several utilities on the Mac App Store, it would be trivial to put an app there that gets set off by a timer, exploits root, and wreaks havoc. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=os+x+root+exploit&gws…

Except you have get through Apple's code review and then once you activate Apple can push a button and wipe out all the installs with a single button push.

Yeah, cracking is asymmetric warfare that we have no hope of winning, I think anyone with any knowledge of computers realizes that is true. It doesn't mean we should smugly shoot down anything that makes it incrementally harder.

Post reply on HN