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

131–140 of 185 posts

Re: Haskell for Mac

#131

Post by eridius »

teacup50 wrote: post #110
eridius wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of rootless (SIP) is to prevent malware from being able to embed itself into the system such that it's difficult or impossible to remove. And it's also a completely different technology than sandboxing.

Which in of itself is pretty much an impossible goal, and in the meantime, it destroys a litany of use-cases that make computers useful to people.

No it doesn't. It should be vanishingly rare for software not shipped by Apple to be impacted by rootless. The whole point of the feature is to prevent files that should never be modified from being modified. The only software that I can think of that's impacted by rootless is Xcode, which is of course Apple's own app. I can't think of anything else that should be hampered by the inability to modify system files. Can you name any other software that has a problem with this?

And if you really want to disable rootless anyway, you can do so. Boot into the recovery partition and there's an option there to turn off rootless.

I'm also completely baffled by the claim that, just because no security solution is 100% perfect, that we shouldn't even try. That makes no sense at all. Yes, security is hard. But protecting you from 99% of all malware, even if there's the rare case of malware that gets past you, is still extremely useful. Besides, it's awfully cynical to declare that SIP is an impossible goal before you've even looked at it.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#132

Post by ics »

JadeNB wrote: post #122

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 ope…

Quoting /u/kamatsu (from reddit): "Some context. This is a very early version released by /u/chak in time for ICFP. There are lots more features planned, so don't view this as the final product."

Comparing it to HP doesn't really make sense; it's a very early stage IDE with some yet-unreleased libraries and Xcode-like features/interaction (see Playgrounds) by a known GHC/Haskell developer.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#133

Post by ddoolin »

eridius wrote: post #131
teacup50 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in of itself is pretty much an impossible goal, and in the meantime, it destroys a litany of use-cases that make computers useful to people.

No it doesn't. It should be vanishingly rare for software not shipped by Apple to be impacted by rootless. The whole point of the feature is to prevent files that should never be modified from being modified. The only software that I can think of that's impacted by rootless is Xcode, which is of course Apple's own app. I can't think of anything else that should be hampered by the inability to modify system files. Can…

Just found one yesterday: https://github.com/binaryage/asepsis/issues/30

But, you can disable SIP so not sure how much it really matters.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#134

Post by eridius »

ddoolin wrote: post #133
eridius wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn't. It should be vanishingly rare for software not shipped by Apple to be impacted by rootless. The whole point of the feature is to prevent files that should never be modified from being modified. The only software that I can think of that's impacted by rootless is Xcode, which is of course Apple's own app. I can't think of anything else that should be hampered by the inability to modify system files. Can…

Just found one yesterday: https://github.com/binaryage/asepsis/issues/30 But, you can disable SIP so not sure how much it really matters.

Oh geeze. That doesn't even have anything to do with rootless. The issue there is library interposing. Asepsis works by interposing itself into every process that links DesktopServicesPriv.framework and replaces several libc calls.

Good catch on finding something that breaks with SIP, but even if you philosophically disagree with the idea of rootless, you should still agree with the notion that library interposing is a serious security threat and should welcome the changes to block interposing of system processes[1].

[1] From the What's New In El Capitan docs[2], the specific aspect of SIP that applies here is "Code injection and runtime attachments to system binaries are no longer permitted".

[2] https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/mac/releaseno...

Re: Haskell for Mac

#135

Post by seanmcdirmid »

delinka wrote: post #88
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are charging money for it, so that is reason enough to use the Mac app store. If it was free, then I totally agree.

They can charge for it on their own web site. No requirement to go through MAS to sell Mac software. If people are having a problem with this, complain to the author of the software.

Charging money is hard if you aren't a big company, which is why app stores have been super successful.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#136

Post by chc »

dasil003 wrote: post #130
feelix wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That seems to be orthogonal to the sandbox, which is the measure under criticism here.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#137

Post by seanmcdirmid »

59nadir wrote: post #124
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?

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.

So you mean, Haskell has a bunch of people who prefer to use the force rather than their targeting computers? So Haskell's language design obviates the need for good code completion or pervasive display of type inference results?

Also, as the joke goes, well typed programs can't go wrong in Haskell because the debugger just isn't that great.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#138

Post by Tehnix »

jd3 wrote: post #104

I'm just glad there's a nice binary of GHC available to download from somewhere. I'm running 10.11, and I had to compile GHC from source (homebrew) on my MacBook air in order to install youtube-dl with rtmpdump support. It took literally all night to compile. Hours and hours and hours.

Didn't https://ghcformacosx.github.io/ work for you? I have no problems on 10.11 with GHC.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#139

Post by seanmcdirmid »

eropple wrote: post #121
efnx wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

Scala is another one of those languages whose type information should enable a really good advanced experience, but the IDEs are struggling with respect to their peers (heroic efforts from jet brains and type safe not with standing). As parent said, many communities really don't appreciate or understand IDEs, and so what gets done reflects that.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#140

Post by outworlder »

teacup50 wrote: post #115
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.…

I don't understand why they're only releasing this through the App Store in the first place. - Giving 30% to Apple is no small thing - You lose the ability to maintain a direct relationship with your customers, provide upgrade pricing, etc - Any updates are gated behind a delay-and-frustration-prone release process. - There are plenty of services that will handle billing for 5% or less, compared to Apple's 30%. Howev…

Is the company located in the US? Or in a Stripe-supported country?

If not, there's your answer.

Post reply on HN