2 ms·

> My point is there's no "lack" of tooling. All the more reason to have an IDE. > More and more beginners nowadays do not want to install a whole new IDE Tha

> My point is there's no "lack" of tooling. All the more reason to have an IDE. > More and more beginners nowadays do not want to install a whole new IDE That's incommensurate with reality, to put it mildly. IntelliJ is out of control, partly because java itself is horrendously convoluted, but that's an exception. A beginner would rather have a tool to support their learning curve than not. I guess it's a matter of what constitutes a "beginner". I do not disagree that people prefer to keep their own IDEs, but that's impractical across all languages. You're going to lose tooling along the integration path, naturally.

ivanbakel 6y ago
> All the more reason to have an IDE No, all the less reason. The path existing Haskell tools are taking makes sense. An IDE would be a massive community undertaking to do well, and still a waste of massive community effort to do poorly. > IntelliJ is out of control, partly because java itself is horrendously convoluted, but that's an exception. ...and partly because Java is many users' first language, and partly because its ecosystem is notoriously complicated to configure and use, and partly because IntelliJ is so mature, and.... I think IntelliJ doesn't prove your point at all. It is essentially nothing like what a hypothetical Haskell IDE would be, either in users or use-cases. I appreciate that beginners want tooling, but I am arguing that an IDE is precisely not what that tooling should be.