3 ms·

No. This is not the community's doing. It is FP Complete, a corporation attempting to subvert the haskell community for their financial benefit. The purpose

No. This is not the community's doing. It is FP Complete, a corporation attempting to subvert the haskell community for their financial benefit. The purpose of this site is to make newcomers think the FP complete tools are the tools to use, rather than the official ones.

tome 10y ago
> rather than the official ones What makes them "official"?
- MustardTiger 10y ago
  What makes python "official"?
  - tome 10y ago
    You're the one who is claiming there are "official" Haskell tools, so back up your claim. What makes them "official"?
    - MustardTiger 10y ago
      I already did. The same thing that makes every other official tool official. Being released by the organization behind the language/platform/whatever.
      - tome 10y ago
        So who's behind C? C++? Haskell has a language standard and has historically had competing implementations. None of them is "official", nor is any of the infrastructure.
        MustardTiger 10y ago
        We're talking about GHC.
        tome 10y ago
        No we're not. Haskell.org used to advertise a wide variety of Haskell compilers https://web.archive.org/web/20050728010349/http://www.haskell.org/implementations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20050728010349/http://www.haskel... It is in no sense the "official" outlet for GHC. It's an outlet that promoted other people's work, and anyone else is welcome to make a new outlet of their own.
        MustardTiger 10y ago
        It is the outlet endorsed by the developers of GHC. The fact that there used to be other compilers does not change this at all.
        michaelt_ 10y ago
        www.haskell.org didn't used to take for granted that ghc is 'the' official haskell implementation. If you look at https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.or... which immediately lists implementations and compare it to https://web.archive.org/web/20100402011002/http://www.haskell.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20100402011002/http://www.haskel... a year later you will be reminded of the rather spectacular struggles that preceded the ghc-centrism of haskell.org . The change was closely associated with the appearance of the haskell platform, and the arguments very similar to those concerning stack and stackage. If you want paranoid theories of corrupt commercial motives in that case, I can produce several incompatible ones for you to choose among.
        sclv 10y ago
        YHC, Hugs, and nhc all discontinued development. The former is now virtually uncompilable (and was never complete), Hugs is officially unmaintained, nhc hasn't seen a release since 2010 so is not under new development. While there was discussion over this, it doesn't at all resemble the set of arguments more recently.
axman6 10y ago
You do understand that comments like this are actually building their case for problems in the community right? I've read several of your comments on this page, and you're the only one making accusations without any evidence, and turning this into a flame war. If you don't like stack, don't use it. I'm not a big fan of this whole community splitting action, but to think that it's been undertaken as a coup d'état to take control of the community by a commercial entity is verging on tinfoil hat territory. And you know what? Stack is a fantastic tool for newcomers, we use it exclusively for our commercial Haskell projects and it's changed our development practices for the better by a long way. Something that built today I can be sure will build in a year without changes - cabal has never been able to guarantee that. I'm really glad someone has put in the huge amount of effort to make a better Haskell build tool, it's been far too long coming.
- MustardTiger 10y ago
  No, this whole "any negative response to our hostile actions justifies our hostile actions" nonsense doesn't fly. It is begging the question. And you are spreading FUD again. Cabal absolutely is able to guarantee that, and always has. All you do is exactly what stack is doing, pin yourself to a specific version of your dependencies.
  - axman6 10y ago
    I'm not going to argue with you, I don't think you're contributing anything to the conversation, and your tone definitely isn't, that's all

tome 10y ago

> rather than the official ones What makes them "official"?

MustardTiger 10y ago
What makes python "official"?
- tome 10y ago
  You're the one who is claiming there are "official" Haskell tools, so back up your claim. What makes them "official"?
  - MustardTiger 10y ago
    I already did. The same thing that makes every other official tool official. Being released by the organization behind the language/platform/whatever.
    - tome 10y ago
      So who's behind C? C++? Haskell has a language standard and has historically had competing implementations. None of them is "official", nor is any of the infrastructure.
      - MustardTiger 10y ago
        We're talking about GHC.
        tome 10y ago
        No we're not. Haskell.org used to advertise a wide variety of Haskell compilers https://web.archive.org/web/20050728010349/http://www.haskell.org/implementations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20050728010349/http://www.haskel... It is in no sense the "official" outlet for GHC. It's an outlet that promoted other people's work, and anyone else is welcome to make a new outlet of their own.
        MustardTiger 10y ago
        It is the outlet endorsed by the developers of GHC. The fact that there used to be other compilers does not change this at all.
        michaelt_ 10y ago
        www.haskell.org didn't used to take for granted that ghc is 'the' official haskell implementation. If you look at https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20090129200859/http://haskell.or... which immediately lists implementations and compare it to https://web.archive.org/web/20100402011002/http://www.haskell.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20100402011002/http://www.haskel... a year later you will be reminded of the rather spectacular struggles that preceded the ghc-centrism of haskell.org . The change was closely associated with the appearance of the haskell platform, and the arguments very similar to those concerning stack and stackage. If you want paranoid theories of corrupt commercial motives in that case, I can produce several incompatible ones for you to choose among.
        sclv 10y ago
        YHC, Hugs, and nhc all discontinued development. The former is now virtually uncompilable (and was never complete), Hugs is officially unmaintained, nhc hasn't seen a release since 2010 so is not under new development. While there was discussion over this, it doesn't at all resemble the set of arguments more recently.

axman6 10y ago

You do understand that comments like this are actually building their case for problems in the community right? I've read several of your comments on this page, and you're the only one making accusations without any evidence, and turning this into a flame war. If you don't like stack, don't use it. I'm not a big fan of this whole community splitting action, but to think that it's been undertaken as a coup d'état to take control of the community by a commercial entity is verging on tinfoil hat territory. And you know what? Stack is a fantastic tool for newcomers, we use it exclusively for our commercial Haskell projects and it's changed our development practices for the better by a long way. Something that built today I can be sure will build in a year without changes - cabal has never been able to guarantee that. I'm really glad someone has put in the huge amount of effort to make a better Haskell build tool, it's been far too long coming.

MustardTiger 10y ago
No, this whole "any negative response to our hostile actions justifies our hostile actions" nonsense doesn't fly. It is begging the question. And you are spreading FUD again. Cabal absolutely is able to guarantee that, and always has. All you do is exactly what stack is doing, pin yourself to a specific version of your dependencies.
- axman6 10y ago
  I'm not going to argue with you, I don't think you're contributing anything to the conversation, and your tone definitely isn't, that's all