I don't think the development tools are the real problem;
it's the size of the pile of readily-available Haskell
modules (and {libraries,sets} of modules) that do useful
things.
Nowadays, when setting out to tackle a programming problem
(in any language), you kinda hope that big chunks of the
code has already been written for you (as modules/libraries
of some sort). The typical application is pretty high up
the food chain. With Haskell, it's typically, "I'd love to
write this program in Haskell, but I'd first need 6 months
to write the needed infrastructure..."
The great thing about "the modules problem" is that nearly
anyone can contribute -- you don't have to know the innards
of any Haskell implementation in order to be useful.
Yes, I've said this all before... :-)
Will
"Mark P Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One of the greatest disappointments to date of the move
> to more liberal (i.e. free software) licenses for systems
> like Hugs and GHC, is that it has done almost nothing to
> stimulate contributions to the implementations themselves
> from outside the immediate (and small) group of developers
> concerned. ...
