3 ms·

The only thing I ever saw Don Stewart "bombing" were factual evidence. This is not surprising coming from someone involved with Haskell. Do I really need to po

by codexon 16y ago

The only thing I ever saw Don Stewart "bombing" were factual evidence. This is not surprising coming from someone involved with Haskell. Do I really need to point to you the bug ticket that it was only 8 months ago that you could use something other than GMP? http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/601 http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/601 Even with the option to dynamically link, it still doesn't change the fact that it was the __default__. And what a scary default that was. Company lawyers don't like to touch anything related to GPL with a 10-foot pole, for the reason that it is really up to the jury to decide what is a "derivative work" even if you only link dynamically! Maybe if you live in France, or have a 5 person company, this is an acceptable state. Anyway I am done, you and Dons win, are you happy? I simply have no ulterior motive or incentive to defend my findings against organized groups who have their livelihoods and PhDs based on Haskell.

loup-vaillant 16y ago
Err, I was only objecting to your attack on Don's on-line behaviour. Actually I'm (still) an outsider. Consider "what I ever saw" as anecdotal evidence. Now it's a pity that companies are scared of the GPL. As far as I know, most software is custom or private, is never released[1], and thus can't possibly infringe the GPL. I think the real problem here is corporate culture. No company would object using the glibc in a proprietary program. So why would they be scared of any other LGPL library? When they don't even release the software? That's plainly irrational. Now our choice is hard, but simple: get rid of the "GPL == we can't use it" line of thinking, or get rid of restrictive licences. [1]: Many custom software actually belong to the company that wrote it, rather than to the company (or government) that purchased it. In this case GPL infringement could happen. But really, I can't fathom why some customers still don't demand complete ownership (including source code) for their custom software. That strikes me as either wildly misinformed or incredibly silly.
- codexon 16y ago
  Why do you object? I just proved to you the legitimacy of my arguments while you still stand by Don's complete denial?I think it is very off-putting that anything remotely negative about Haskell is usually met with snide comments questioning their intelligence or being labeled as a troll. It also doesn't help that my comment was upvoted a few times, and when Dons & Co. replies, it drops to -3. I've also observed this type of behavior on Reddit. You aren't really an outsider considering your participation in the Haskell Cafe mailing list and being credited in Real World Haskell. And companies do object to using glibc in a proprietary program obviously. You are probably thinking of the GCC runtime which has an explicit exception for commercial programs that prevents them from turning GPL. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception.html You also don't have any proof that most software is custom or private. Even if it is the majority, you cannot deny that the shrink-wrap industry is huge, especially during most of Haskell's existence. The answer is to avoid GPL code in the language which is what I was saying the whole time. You don't put the foundation of your business at risk just so you can use a cool new language.
  - loup-vaillant 16y ago
    > It also doesn't help that my comment was upvoted a few times, and when Dons & Co. replies, it drops to -3. Interestingly, I saw it happen almost everywhere. It looks like people are more likely to down-vote comments which are contradicted by a recognized authority. This is of course not a good thing. > You aren't really an outsider considering your participation in the Haskell Cafe mailing list and being credited in Real World Haskell. I didn't post more than a few messages, 2 years ago, and I posted about 3 minor comments in Real World Haskell. I've read a few papers, but seldom have written anything (except http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/assignment http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/assignment of course). I'm not an outsider, but hardly what I consider to be an Insider. > You also don't have any proof that most software is custom or private. I don't. But in this (huge) niche, my point still stand: being afraid of the GPL is silly. Corporations that are should stop being. > you cannot deny that the shrink-wrap industry is huge I cannot and I won't. > The answer is to avoid GPL code in the language […] Yes, assuming you want the (proprietary) shrink-wrap industry to use Haskell. I want it gone. Therefore, I see the GPL as the solution.
applicative 16y ago
This is febrile raving, codexon, why are you insisting on it? It is like a kind of madness, right on its face. A range of solutions were given on http://haskell.forkio.com/gmpwindows http://haskell.forkio.com/gmpwindows of which the writer, Sigbjorn Finne, said "nothing too magic or new here". None of them seem particularly appetizing, of course, which is presumably why people continued to labor.
- applicative 16y ago
  I was trying to think why I found this so disturbing: "I simply have no ulterior motive or incentive against organized groups who have their livelihoods and PhDs based on Haskell." The thing is, it cannot be honest. A simple reflection, a Google search, e.g. http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&q=%22Don+Stewart%22+site:http://hackage.haskell.org/&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&a... and some time spent reflecting on the modules linked, will show that Don S. could make a far better 'livelihood' doing just about anything other than writing Haskell. The trouble you are faced with is this, that the only way to explain all of this is that he does these things because he thinks they are right and good, and for no other reason.
  - codexon 16y ago
    He does it because he is biased towards something he has already spent years on his PhD candidacy and many hours on writing libraries already. If he completes his PhD, it is likely that he will try to get a Haskell job. Just because he wrote a thousand Haskell packages doesn't mean he is as suitable in another language. Sure he could probably be a C programmer, but his pay grade won't be as high as if he landed a Haskell job to take advantage of his experience and degree. That you cannot see this is because you also have the same bias as Dons.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

by codexon 16y ago

loup-vaillant 16y ago

Err, I was only objecting to your attack on Don's on-line behaviour. Actually I'm (still) an outsider. Consider "what I ever saw" as anecdotal evidence. Now it's a pity that companies are scared of the GPL. As far as I know, most software is custom or private, is never released[1], and thus can't possibly infringe the GPL. I think the real problem here is corporate culture. No company would object using the glibc in a proprietary program. So why would they be scared of any other LGPL library? When they don't even release the software? That's plainly irrational. Now our choice is hard, but simple: get rid of the "GPL == we can't use it" line of thinking, or get rid of restrictive licences. [1]: Many custom software actually belong to the company that wrote it, rather than to the company (or government) that purchased it. In this case GPL infringement could happen. But really, I can't fathom why some customers still don't demand complete ownership (including source code) for their custom software. That strikes me as either wildly misinformed or incredibly silly.

codexon 16y ago
Why do you object? I just proved to you the legitimacy of my arguments while you still stand by Don's complete denial?I think it is very off-putting that anything remotely negative about Haskell is usually met with snide comments questioning their intelligence or being labeled as a troll. It also doesn't help that my comment was upvoted a few times, and when Dons & Co. replies, it drops to -3. I've also observed this type of behavior on Reddit. You aren't really an outsider considering your participation in the Haskell Cafe mailing list and being credited in Real World Haskell. And companies do object to using glibc in a proprietary program obviously. You are probably thinking of the GCC runtime which has an explicit exception for commercial programs that prevents them from turning GPL. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception.html You also don't have any proof that most software is custom or private. Even if it is the majority, you cannot deny that the shrink-wrap industry is huge, especially during most of Haskell's existence. The answer is to avoid GPL code in the language which is what I was saying the whole time. You don't put the foundation of your business at risk just so you can use a cool new language.
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  > It also doesn't help that my comment was upvoted a few times, and when Dons & Co. replies, it drops to -3. Interestingly, I saw it happen almost everywhere. It looks like people are more likely to down-vote comments which are contradicted by a recognized authority. This is of course not a good thing. > You aren't really an outsider considering your participation in the Haskell Cafe mailing list and being credited in Real World Haskell. I didn't post more than a few messages, 2 years ago, and I posted about 3 minor comments in Real World Haskell. I've read a few papers, but seldom have written anything (except http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/assignment http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/assignment of course). I'm not an outsider, but hardly what I consider to be an Insider. > You also don't have any proof that most software is custom or private. I don't. But in this (huge) niche, my point still stand: being afraid of the GPL is silly. Corporations that are should stop being. > you cannot deny that the shrink-wrap industry is huge I cannot and I won't. > The answer is to avoid GPL code in the language […] Yes, assuming you want the (proprietary) shrink-wrap industry to use Haskell. I want it gone. Therefore, I see the GPL as the solution.

applicative 16y ago

This is febrile raving, codexon, why are you insisting on it? It is like a kind of madness, right on its face. A range of solutions were given on http://haskell.forkio.com/gmpwindows http://haskell.forkio.com/gmpwindows of which the writer, Sigbjorn Finne, said "nothing too magic or new here". None of them seem particularly appetizing, of course, which is presumably why people continued to labor.

applicative 16y ago
I was trying to think why I found this so disturbing: "I simply have no ulterior motive or incentive against organized groups who have their livelihoods and PhDs based on Haskell." The thing is, it cannot be honest. A simple reflection, a Google search, e.g. http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&q=%22Don+Stewart%22+site:http://hackage.haskell.org/&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&a... and some time spent reflecting on the modules linked, will show that Don S. could make a far better 'livelihood' doing just about anything other than writing Haskell. The trouble you are faced with is this, that the only way to explain all of this is that he does these things because he thinks they are right and good, and for no other reason.
- codexon 16y ago
  He does it because he is biased towards something he has already spent years on his PhD candidacy and many hours on writing libraries already. If he completes his PhD, it is likely that he will try to get a Haskell job. Just because he wrote a thousand Haskell packages doesn't mean he is as suitable in another language. Sure he could probably be a C programmer, but his pay grade won't be as high as if he landed a Haskell job to take advantage of his experience and degree. That you cannot see this is because you also have the same bias as Dons.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]