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

141–150 of 185 posts

Re: Haskell for Mac

#141

Post by oisdk »

Tehnix wrote: post #3
eridius wrote: post #2

Reading this page, it sounds very cool. It also sounds like it's heavily inspired by Swift Playgrounds, including using SpriteKit as an example. I am a bit baffled as to why it says the Haskell code can't initiate network connections. Yeah the app is sandboxed, but sandboxed apps can easily request network access. And it seems like that's a common-enough thing to want that it should support it.

Yeah, that one stuck to me as well. I don't know if they mean anything specific with "network connections" here, cause I see a lot of apps that talk to the outside world on the MAS.

While you are allowed network-connected apps on the MAS, you have to specify the entitlement. I'd imagine that's something you'd have to justify (or at the very least you'd get more scrutiny and a longer approval time).

Re: Haskell for Mac

#142

Post by JadeNB »

ics wrote: post #132
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.

> Comparing it to HP doesn't really make sense

Indeed, I should have made it clear that I was looking for an appropriate comparison, not meaning to suggest that HP (which was just the first thing that came to mind) was an appropriate comparison. Thanks for the insight!

Re: Haskell for Mac

#143

Post by oisdk »

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…

The blog link on the website fleshes out the thinking a little further:

http://blog.haskellformac.com/blog/from-the-read-eval-print-...

The author also had a blog post on it here:

http://justtesting.org/post/103422773731/why-are-playgrounds...

Re: Haskell for Mac

#144

Post by teacup50 »

outworlder wrote: post #140
teacup50 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are plenty of long-standing options other than Stripe if you don't go the "run the store yourself" route.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#145

Post by teacup50 »

eridius wrote: post #134
ddoolin wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The only way I can get features that are important to my daily work is to interpose system processes.

So no, I don't welcome "SIP". There are better ways to solve that problem.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#146

Post by JadeNB »

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.

I think that the Haskell Platform has binaries for the Mac: https://www.haskell.org/platform/mac.html .

Re: Haskell for Mac

#147

Post by JadeNB »

carterschonwald wrote: post #32

This looks like it's by Manuel Chakravarty. He's a long time Haskell contributor / researcher. His research lab is responsible for a huge chunk of array fusion related research that's happened using Haskell over the years. Given the baked in support for sprite kit, I presume that this is an evolution of the tools he used to teach his young ones how to write games.

I really enjoyed reading about that learning / teaching process as it unfolded. I think the discussion is at the GitHub repository https://github.com/mchakravarty/lets-program , though a glance doesn't reveal how up-to-date it is (it refers to 3 coding sessions, then numbers them 1 through 7).

Re: Haskell for Mac

#148

Post by cuddlybacon »

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.

Coming from the other side, it seems like "because you should be able to do it manually" seems like a poor reason to not provide the option to have things automated.

The computer is more accurate and faster at determining the type of an expression than humans are. That seems like a big part of the value proposition of static languages. So why not let it tell you the type in the editor instead of having to stop what you are doing to compile it (which may require fiddling with the code to get a meaningful type error)?

Re: Haskell for Mac

#149

Post by rdsnsca »

gohrt wrote: post #126
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?!

NO

Re: Haskell for Mac

#150

Post by feelix »

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 is nothing that cannot be trivially obviated with a date check before doing bad stuff.
Post reply on HN