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

171–180 of 185 posts

Re: Haskell for Mac

#171

Post by [deleted] »

cuddlybacon wrote: post #148
59nadir wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 y…

[deleted]

Re: Haskell for Mac

#172

Post by 59nadir »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #137
59nadir wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Most serious Haskell users are most likely using a REPL and when doing this it's trivial to get and think about type information even while checking other stuff. It's also obviously part of the thought process while developing anyway, so I don't see the same value in this as you do. There's a cost to having a full IDE anyway and it's more sensible to get the features you do want (auto-completion, etc.) from plugins and then not using a IDE.

Even if you want these things, there are better ways to go about this instead of making a whole gargantuan interface to get a couple of features.

I'm not usually one to tell people what they should be working on, but time could be spent on this instead:

https://github.com/haskell/haskell-mode/wiki

(See also this for how to get in-source error information and type checking, if needed:

https://wiki.haskell.org/Emacs)

Re: Haskell for Mac

#173

Post by tempodox »

microtonal wrote: post #57
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.

Yet. And we have heard this for how long already? Doing so would basically be suicide for the Mac. First of all because a sizeable chunk of users are technical users. Secondly, a lot of software is not available in the Mac App store and likely will never be (I think Microsoft and Adobe would rather abandon OS X than giving 30% for each cloud subscription to Apple and being at the mercy of the MAS gatekeepers).

As to your question of “how long already”, I found a blog post (not mine) from 2000 A.D. that considers “The Future of Apple's Curated Computing”:

http://widgetsandshit.com/teddziuba/2010/05/the-future-of-ap...

Re: Haskell for Mac

#174

Post by justthistime_ »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #139
eropple wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Which languages have better IDE support than Scala?

Java, C# ... and both received probably hundred times more man-power than Scala IDEs.

What else?

My experience: All dynamic languages – probably not. C++? Hell no. F#? No. OCaml? No. Haskell? No.

Which language do you think of?

Re: Haskell for Mac

#175

Post by seanmcdirmid »

justthistime_ wrote: post #174
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Which languages have better IDE support than Scala? Java, C# ... and both received probably hundred times more man-power than Scala IDEs. What else? My experience: All dynamic languages – probably not. C++? Hell no. F#? No. OCaml? No. Haskell? No. Which language do you think of?

F# has pretty good IDE support, and type providers are really nice as code completion extensions. C++ has excellent IDE support in visual studio, note I'm including the debugger here also, as that is part of the experience!

Then there is objective C, Swift, Kotlin, Dart, Typescript, some versions of smalltalk. Many of those languages were designed specifically for IDE use (dart and typescript definitely).

Re: Haskell for Mac

#176

Post by ddoolin »

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…

I don't really know enough to form an opinion one way or the other, I just had recalled seeing it at the time I read your post. I wouldn't have used Asepsis even if I wasn't on El Capitan as I definitely didn't like the sound of how it achieved what it claimed (which you also pointed out).

Re: Haskell for Mac

#177

Post by jaegerpicker »

teacup50 wrote: post #145
eridius wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There really aren't better ways to solve that on a mass scale at this time. I intend no offense but to be honest I care much more about my system's security vs your need to interpose system processes. SIP is a step in the correct direction for security. Is it perfect or a catch all? No of course not but it's another layer of security that helps the situation overall.

Re: Haskell for Mac

#178

Post by warmfuzzykitten »

spike021 wrote: post #99

Was a bit disappointed when I found out they don't have any education/academic discount beyond education bulk purchasing. Looks pretty cool though.

It's a pricing problem. To begin with, $25 probably isn't enough to make the project financially successful, as it can't be expected to sell in large volume. Small-volume products need to find a sweet spot in the demand*unit-price curve. If no such spot exists, as may well be the case for software development tools, the developer may as well give it away. The Mac market is particularly low-cost, low-return.

Secondly, if the product were priced at a point where it produced a viable revenue stream - for example, Logic Pro X addresses a very large market and is priced at $199.99 - one could hardly expect the student discounted price for the full product to be less than $25. However, my experience has been that no matter how low-priced the product (greater than $0), students will always ask for a lower price. :)

Re: Haskell for Mac

#179

Post by warmfuzzykitten »

amelius wrote: post #29

Why do we still have platform-specific applications in 2015? Any good software engineering environment should set an example and show that we do not need to live by such artificial restrictions.

Just a point of etiquette. Does it really make sense to down-vote a question to oblivion when the question has attracted reasonable responses?

In fact, this question contains by implication another seemingly reasonable question: Given that there exists a universally available cross-platform development API, why, in 2015, is anyone writing anything other than a web application?

Re: Haskell for Mac

#180

Post by kzhahou »

tinco wrote: post #21
kzhahou wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like you, I am also sick and tired of people trying to come up with easy-to-use tools for learning Haskell. I love the language, and feel that if someone wants to learn it in a "sandbox", then there's no point. I can't even imagine Haskell without network connections, as we all know that Haskell's main appeal lies in web services and systems-level programming. This developer better think again before he gets my 20ish…

Oh yeah.. evil programmer wanting 20 dollars from you. Good thing you saw through his plot and held them safe in your purse. We definitely all know what you know is 100% true, no one ever uses Haskell for anything else than web services and systems level programming.

BTW, a little late here... but my comment was actually intended as pure sarcasm over the fact that anyone would so angrily scoff at the idea of paying $20 to a fellow developer and Haskell enthusiast, who is just trying to help others enjoy the language.

Sarcasm is tough.

Post reply on HN