5 ms·

I think the package ecosystem is a big barrier. I code on OS X, and it seems like half the Haskell packages I try to install fail to compile. I always get super

by jarrett 12y ago

I think the package ecosystem is a big barrier. I code on OS X, and it seems like half the Haskell packages I try to install fail to compile. I always get super motivated to do my next project in Haskell, but then give up when I can't install the required libraries. Maybe the situation is better on Linux. In any case, I think Haskell will need reliable package management on at least OS X and Linux before most developers consider it a serious choice for real projects.

IsTom 12y ago
It's not that much better on Linux. As a fan of Haskell it makes me sad.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  It's tractable, but a lot more manual than it should be. It makes everyone sad.
  - jarrett 12y ago
    Manual is OK if there's at least a clear path to getting something to install. I don't see that path, though. My biggest issue is that I don't have the expertise to debug an obscure Haskell compilation error. I won't develop that expertise unless I can use Haskell over the long term on real projects. I can't do that unless libraries are available. So it's a chicken and egg problem. I think the same is true for many people who'd like to dive deeper into Haskell. If we can't initially lean on the work of expert package maintainers, we can't ever become Haskell experts ourselves. I believe the developer community could expand very quickly if this problem could be solved.
    - dllthomas 12y ago
      Certainly the case. Much eased (though not eliminated) by the recent addition of cabal sandboxes. There's still no good way to see all the native libraries required by a cabal install, and occasionally there are actual conflicts between packages... I've been meaning to populate http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Resolving_Cabal_Hell http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Resolving_Cabal_Hell but have been kinda hoping (almost certainly in vain) that someone with deeper knowledge beats me to it.
      - jarrett 12y ago
        The sandbox sounds great. I haven't been able to get Cabal 1.8 to install on a Mac, but I'd love to try it.
        dllthomas 12y ago
        Huh. Pop into #haskell on irc.freenode.net, someone there can probably help you. I've got basically no experience with Mac myself.
zmoazeni 12y ago
I'm not sure which issues you're running into, but for what it's worth, I've had a lot better success using the newer cabal sandboxes[1] than just running `cabal install foo` all the time. (If you're from the Ruby world, it acts a lot more like bundler with `--standalone`). Previously, I had more issues with conflicting version constraints which I think is more of an issue with library authors and not necessarily cabal itself. [1] - http://coldwa.st/e/blog/2013-08-20-Cabal-sandbox.html http://coldwa.st/e/blog/2013-08-20-Cabal-sandbox.html
- jarrett 12y ago
  I'd love to, but Haskell Platform ships with an old version of Cabal that doesn't have sandboxes. The new version of Cabal itself doesn't compile on the Mac. (In keeping with the theme of "nothing compiles.") Edit: At least, I can't get the new version of Cabal/Cabal Install working on my Mac.
  - tel 12y ago
    There was a relatively serious bug caused by Mavericks' clang being a non-standard CPP, but I think that's fixed in newer versions of GHC. It's certainly possible to get a Cabal compiled on Mac, though.
  - coolsunglasses 12y ago
    I was able to compile Cabal/Cabal Install 1.18 and 1.20 on my Mavericks machine. Have you sought help from the #haskell IRC channel?
  - danieldk 12y ago
    Against the usual recommendations, I install the Haskell platform with Homebrew. After that a 'cabal update ; cabal install cabal-install' gives a newer version without any problems. And I agree that sandboxes are great!
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

by jarrett 12y ago

IsTom 12y ago

It's not that much better on Linux. As a fan of Haskell it makes me sad.

dllthomas 12y ago
It's tractable, but a lot more manual than it should be. It makes everyone sad.
- jarrett 12y ago
  Manual is OK if there's at least a clear path to getting something to install. I don't see that path, though. My biggest issue is that I don't have the expertise to debug an obscure Haskell compilation error. I won't develop that expertise unless I can use Haskell over the long term on real projects. I can't do that unless libraries are available. So it's a chicken and egg problem. I think the same is true for many people who'd like to dive deeper into Haskell. If we can't initially lean on the work of expert package maintainers, we can't ever become Haskell experts ourselves. I believe the developer community could expand very quickly if this problem could be solved.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    Certainly the case. Much eased (though not eliminated) by the recent addition of cabal sandboxes. There's still no good way to see all the native libraries required by a cabal install, and occasionally there are actual conflicts between packages... I've been meaning to populate http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Resolving_Cabal_Hell http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Resolving_Cabal_Hell but have been kinda hoping (almost certainly in vain) that someone with deeper knowledge beats me to it.
    - jarrett 12y ago
      The sandbox sounds great. I haven't been able to get Cabal 1.8 to install on a Mac, but I'd love to try it.
      - dllthomas 12y ago
        Huh. Pop into #haskell on irc.freenode.net, someone there can probably help you. I've got basically no experience with Mac myself.

zmoazeni 12y ago

I'm not sure which issues you're running into, but for what it's worth, I've had a lot better success using the newer cabal sandboxes[1] than just running `cabal install foo` all the time. (If you're from the Ruby world, it acts a lot more like bundler with `--standalone`). Previously, I had more issues with conflicting version constraints which I think is more of an issue with library authors and not necessarily cabal itself. [1] - http://coldwa.st/e/blog/2013-08-20-Cabal-sandbox.html http://coldwa.st/e/blog/2013-08-20-Cabal-sandbox.html

jarrett 12y ago
I'd love to, but Haskell Platform ships with an old version of Cabal that doesn't have sandboxes. The new version of Cabal itself doesn't compile on the Mac. (In keeping with the theme of "nothing compiles.") Edit: At least, I can't get the new version of Cabal/Cabal Install working on my Mac.
- tel 12y ago
  There was a relatively serious bug caused by Mavericks' clang being a non-standard CPP, but I think that's fixed in newer versions of GHC. It's certainly possible to get a Cabal compiled on Mac, though.
- coolsunglasses 12y ago
  I was able to compile Cabal/Cabal Install 1.18 and 1.20 on my Mavericks machine. Have you sought help from the #haskell IRC channel?
- danieldk 12y ago
  Against the usual recommendations, I install the Haskell platform with Homebrew. After that a 'cabal update ; cabal install cabal-install' gives a newer version without any problems. And I agree that sandboxes are great!

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]