4 ms·
Your response makes it sound like you just had a simple problem like you get with any language, and followed bad advice on solving it based on the assumption th
by papsosouid 14y ago
Your response makes it sound like you just had a simple problem like you get with any language, and followed bad advice on solving it based on the assumption that "cabal is just bad and you have to do this". The big give away is that you didn't need to delete your .cabal directory, advice to do so is coming from someone who doesn't know the basics of how cabal works. It is just storing downloaded sources, all deleting it accomplishes is making you re-download stuff for no reason. The installed packages are in your .ghc directory. Cabal is no more broken than cpan.
- tel 14y agoYou're right that I'm not very fluent on how Cabal works. It worked well enough that I didn't really need to until recently. I'm not claiming either that CPAN is better than Cabal. Could versioning be done better? Probably. I don't even claim to know enough to have a competent suggestion as to how, though. Doesn't mean things don't break, though.
- papsosouid 14y ago>Doesn't mean things don't break, though. Right. The issue is that cabal has unfairly developed a reputation as being broken. People always say stuff like "every other language has this sorted out, why is haskell so bad at it?". When the reality is that the problems you get with cabal are the same ones you get with cpan or pip or anything else.
- tel 14y agoThey're slightly exacerbated in that Cabal/GHC/Haskell type checks and thus has a higher likelihood of discovering mismatches.