Dear all,
I'm getting more and more worried about Haskell users who
depend on multiple Haskell packages and compilers, but don't
want to follow the cvs developments for all of these packages.
I have the feeling that Haskellers who rely on pre-packaged
binaries are not currently getting a good impression of the
state of the art.
To give just one concrete example, what packages do I
recommend to someone wanting to learn a bit of Haskell, and
do some graphics and perhaps windowing, on Windows?
- Hugs (Winhugs bug in current binary release, so better avoid
that and use plain Hugs?)
- HGL (does it work with latest Hugs/GHC, or do I need older
versions? which ones?)
- GHC (current binary release seems to have serious probs on
some Windows versions; has also seen some rapid
development breakage recently, e.g., TH syntax, forcing
other packages to play catch-up just to get working again)
- wxHaskell (works with ghc-6.0.1, will it work with 6.2? what about
Hugs? what about ghc-6.4?)
- some generic text-editor (but on Windows98, the way that .hs
files are associated with Hugs/GHC cannot be modified in
the standard dialogues, as they can for other associations,
so how do I associate .hs files with an editor? I wouldn't
want to recommend some beginner editing the registry for
that purpose..)
The issues are usually small, but there are many of them, each
package has its own, and all too often the response is "fixed in
CVS, will be in next release".
Of course, the next release is a while a away and by that time,
there'll be a different set of small issues plagueing the next set
of binary releases. So, just getting someone started requires
careful investigation/testing and some thinking (instead of:
"just download and install the latest Haskell starters set").
A modular way to fix this would be to have at least once-a-month
patch updates of binary packages, so that one would never be
more than a month away from the fixed versions (instead of having
to wait for the next releases of everything).
A broader approach would be to try and show a united Haskell
tools front to the general Haskeller: Identify a core set of Haskell
tools (the above four would be my initial suggestion), and make
sure that the latest binary releases for these are always in synch
with each other. In other words, someone could go download
them, make a "Haskell tools, Spring 2004" CD, and be sure that
they actually work together while he/she's trying to learn Haskell.
Both GHC and Hugs have had release candidate testing in the
past, but experience and mailing list archives show that there's
always a number of issues that are only detected after the
binary releases. On Windows at least, it seems that everyone
is relying on Sigbjorn to do all the packaging - couldn't the
creation of updated installers be automated (or Haskellised),
so that he'd only have to be bothered for the initial packaging,
not for patchlevel updates?
There are similar issues for Haskellers needing a larger set of
tools and libraries, but those will hopefully be addressed by
the library infrastructure project in the long run, so I'm just
asking about the state of the core tools here.
Opinions?
Claus
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs
