This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 37 comments

[–]UpFromTheGut 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I haven't used either, but you may be interested in Leksah Haskell IDE: http://www.leksah.org/screenshots.html

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (6 children)

I'd consider it rude to ship a language and libraries with a text editor. But that's just me. Come to think of it, all the languages I have learned, I have learned in emacs. Only occasionally have I used anything else, and always I have come back to emacs.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Maybe, but promising a "rich development environment" and delivering a REPL which runs in a DOS box isn't cool.

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (2 children)

There's way more than a REPL. But you might have to make your first steps into command-line land to find out.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

There's way more than a REPL

The compiler...

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (0 children)

...package installing, creating + distribution, doc generator, profiler, unit+randomized testing, and if you would've used any of those, you'd know why it's called a "rich" environment. Add vim, zsh, xterm and xmonad to it and you've got my complete environment.

If you're missing something out of http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications_and_libraries/Program_development , complain to the platform team, but note that it is meant to be a minimal thing.

[–]rooktakesqueen[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I consider it rude to promise a "development environment" that is "rich" and "comprehensive" when you get absolutely no tools to do the development out of the box.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't get the language and libraries with the ability to integrate them with another editor of your choice, but coming with nothing but a REPL is bogus. And it's a terrible idea if Haskell ever wants to be used by more than a tiny fraction of academics and enthusiasts.

[–]barsoap -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And it's a terrible idea if Haskell ever wants to be used by more than a tiny fraction of academics and enthusiasts.

cf. "Avoid success at any cost". Patches are welcome, though.

[–]jessta 5 points6 points  (2 children)

...but you already have a favourite text editor(looks like it's notepad). If they integrated the runtime in to a text editor it probably wouldn't be the text editor you want it integrated with.

[–]astrange 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Although it would be better than Notepad.

[–]rooktakesqueen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My favorite editor is actually emacs, Notepad is just more convenient for jotting things down or clipboard manipulation while in Windows.

[–]milksop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah, but in your image it clearly says "A rich development environment or Haskell programming".

[–]barsoap 2 points3 points  (5 children)

TBH, the platform page should give a couple of links to things not integrated. It's always been meant to be a standard set of libraries, not so much a development environment in the VB sense.

But, yes, the development environment is rich, you only have to add an editor and a shell, which'd be wrong to add to it by default as both are subject of religious wars. Compare cabal/ghc(i) to sourceforge/autohell/make/gcc to get what I mean. Not to mention xmonad.

[–]rooktakesqueen[S] 3 points4 points  (4 children)

To me, a "development environment" means "the complete set of tools that would be required to do development in this language."

It doesn't necessarily have to be an integrated development environment (though that'd be nice as an option), but the point is, what Haskell comes with isn't a development environment in any sense of the phrase. The website acts as if you can click this download link, install it, and have everything you need to do Haskell development, but that just ain't so.

[–]sindisil 3 points4 points  (1 child)

It is a complete set of tools for doing Haskell. What OS doesn't include a text editor and shell?

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What OS doesn't include a text editor and shell?

Emacs. At least no functional ones, that is.

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You can compile multi-file programs with one command, you can make distribution tarballs with one command, you can install any hackage package with one command...

That's all you need. Hlint would be a good addition, but it's not mandatory.

Maybe the problem is that you expect a graphical, not a shell environment?

[–]rooktakesqueen[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Still sounds like a set of tools, and not an "environment."

[–]alexeyr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you see "integrated development environment" there? I don't.

[–]stack_smasher 1 point2 points  (12 children)

You are using Windows. Your argument is invalid.

[–]sindisil -2 points-1 points  (11 children)

Though his argument is stupid, using Windows has nothing to do with it.

Most people use Windows most of the time. Get over it.

[–]stack_smasher 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Easy there, cowboy. It was just a remark made in jest. Get over it.

[–]sindisil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. The jest didn't come through & my "it's the internet - assume they're not serious" filter seems to be on the fritz.

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (5 children)

If so many people are using windows, how come they don't submit patches so that their OS is better supported?

I certainly won't buy a windows license just to shut you up. Bleeding do it yourself.

[–]sindisil -1 points0 points  (4 children)

Um ... what?!

[–]barsoap 2 points3 points  (3 children)

To shut him up. him. not you. don't read what I write, but what I mean.

[–]sindisil 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Heh ... I see now.

As for why more Windows users don't submit patches ... well, the attitude of the OP (whether jesting, as he purports, or serious, as is often the case) explains some of it. Most OSS projects treat Windows as a second class citizen, when they take it into account at all. There are obvious exceptions, and I'm certainly not accusing Haskell of this at all, but it is a factor that keeps many who use Windows from investing strongly in OSS.

[–]barsoap 1 point2 points  (1 child)

let's ask

[–]sindisil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Up-voted (here and there)!

I'm really hoping it get's attention. I'd like to know, especially since I have "multiple citizenship", spending most of my time on Windows at home (probably 85/15 split Windows/Ubuntu Linux), and developing primarily for Linux in my day job (probably 80/15/5 split for Linux/Window/Other OS - though most is cross-platform).

There are some projects that have reasonable participation from Windows users, but usually because they're for Windows (msys, MinGw, and FlashDevelop come to mind).

[–]akallio9000 0 points1 point  (2 children)

What stack_smasher means is that Windows always winds up sucking hind teat WRT open source software, much like the Mac WRT games.

[–]sindisil -1 points0 points  (1 child)

True, though in most cases, nothing stops Windows users from contributing to, or starting, their own OSS.

Granted, there are some OSS projects (git, I'm looking at you, dammit) that make Windows a second or third class citizen. However, many others are either neutral or actively focus on Windows. Most Haskell stuff is in the neutral camp, in my experience.

Finally, as barsoap points out, anecdotal evidence seems to indicate less participation from Windows users in OSS projects. Since most OSS is started, developed and maintained by non-Windows users, it shouldn't be any surprise that Windows support is not a priority.

[–]akallio9000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It would help if Windows wasn't such a quagmire of backward compatibility from a 16 bit "OS" that was more a file system interface than anything else.

[–]audaxxx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hey, i should try this out!

[–]rebo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Other languages function just fine with command line tools, I have no idea why you think Haskell should be any different. A rich development environment does not have to mean a GUI or text editor, it could mean a rich collection of command line tools.

I consider the ruby on rails tools fairly rich and comprehensive, rails, script/server, script/console, rake --tasks etc and not a GUI or rails supplied text editor in sight.

[–]redredditor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude! It comes with the butterfly interface... duh.

http://xkcd.com/378/

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

lol, windows.

[–]UncleBanana -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Holy shit! That is exactly how I reacted after having downloaded this "rich development environment" for 3 hours. Shitbusters!