[darcs-users] Re: darcs issues

John Meacham john at repetae.net
Mon Dec 20 23:32:29 UTC 2004


On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 08:03:08AM -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
> On Monday 20 December 2004 7:50 am, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 07:34:16AM -0500,
> >  Neal D. Becker <ndbecker2 at verizon.net> wrote
> >
> >  a message of 10 lines which said:
> > > which is the implementation language.
> >
> > True, I still cannot run darcs on my UltraSparc/NetBSD since ghc does
> > not compile on it.
> >
> > > Haskell is not exactly your main stream language.
> >
> > This is important when you want to run darcs on some unusual
> > architectures like me. But, for most users, darcs "just works" so the
> > implementation language is irrelevant. Patchers are less common than
> > users, when the program is mature.
> >
> > > I wonder what you think of the idea of a re-implementation in a more
> > > main stream language.
> >
> > darcs is free software. Just do it.
> >
> 
> Well, yes but I'm asking for 2 reasons.  I'm not going to "just do it" if 
> nobody else thinks it's a good idea and would support it.  Also, I don't know 
> anything about Haskell, so I don't think I could do it myself.

<advocacy> 
Well that is the problem then :). Seriously, I don't think anyone who
actually learns haskell would want to use something else, I find it
gives a many-fold increase in my productivity. I would say learning
basic haskell + making a couples major changes would take much less time
than making the changes if darcs were in an imperitive language. It is
not just sort of better, or a preference,  but can drastically change
development times if you know it well.
</advocacy>

        John
-- 
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ 




More information about the darcs-users mailing list