Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: #haskell-in-depth IRC channel
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Benjamin L. Russell dekudekup...@yahoo.com wrote: If neither #haskell nor #haskell-in-depth is appropriate, perhaps they would feel more comfortable in a Haskell-beginners-specific channel? The danger with that is the only people who go there are beginners looking for advice. Without advisers also, it would quickly wither. How has the beginners' mailing list worked out, in this regard? At least with a ML it's possible to set aside some part of the day to answering questions... the same is not really possible for 5-hour-old conversations on IRC. Cheers, D ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: #haskell-in-depth IRC channel
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:35:03 +, Dougal Stanton ith...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Benjamin L. Russell dekudekup...@yahoo.com wrote: If neither #haskell nor #haskell-in-depth is appropriate, perhaps they would feel more comfortable in a Haskell-beginners-specific channel? The danger with that is the only people who go there are beginners looking for advice. Without advisers also, it would quickly wither. How has the beginners' mailing list worked out, in this regard? At least with a ML it's possible to set aside some part of the day to answering questions... the same is not really possible for 5-hour-old conversations on IRC. It seems to have been working out quite well. Last month, there were a total of 57 threads, including 192 messages in Haskell-Beginners. Most questions get responses within a few minutes. You can see the archives for last month at http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/beginners/2009-January/thread.html . -- Benjamin L. Russell -- Benjamin L. Russell / DekuDekuplex at Yahoo dot com http://dekudekuplex.wordpress.com/ Translator/Interpreter / Mobile: +011 81 80-3603-6725 Furuike ya, kawazu tobikomu mizu no oto. -- Matsuo Basho^ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: #haskell-in-depth IRC channel
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:15:48 +, Philippa Cowderoy fli...@flippac.org wrote: [...] If you need to know how to use monads so you can do IO, #haskell-in-depth isn't the place. On the other hand, if you want to discuss how Haskell's monads compare to the category theory or what the category theory can tell us about how individual monads relate to the language as a whole, -in-depth is a good place! In particular, we're hoping that the kind of category theory discussions that give the mistaken impression you actually need to know CT will increasingly live in #haskell-in-depth. We're not after a theory channel though - architectural discussion, compiler implementation, possible type system extensions, library design, all are good subjects. Great work! I look forward to participating sometime in the near future. In that case, for people who need to know how to use monads so that they can do IO, why not create a #haskell-beginners channel? I have occasionally read posts of some users who were hesitant to participate in #haskell until they learned enough to keep up with the discussions there. If neither #haskell nor #haskell-in-depth is appropriate, perhaps they would feel more comfortable in a Haskell-beginners-specific channel? -- Benjamin L. Russell -- Benjamin L. Russell / DekuDekuplex at Yahoo dot com http://dekudekuplex.wordpress.com/ Translator/Interpreter / Mobile: +011 81 80-3603-6725 Furuike ya, kawazu tobikomu mizu no oto. -- Matsuo Basho^ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: #haskell-in-depth IRC channel
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 14:32 +0900, Benjamin L.Russell wrote: On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:15:48 +, Philippa Cowderoy fli...@flippac.org wrote: [...] If you need to know how to use monads so you can do IO, #haskell-in-depth isn't the place. On the other hand, if you want to discuss how Haskell's monads compare to the category theory or what the category theory can tell us about how individual monads relate to the language as a whole, -in-depth is a good place! In particular, we're hoping that the kind of category theory discussions that give the mistaken impression you actually need to know CT will increasingly live in #haskell-in-depth. We're not after a theory channel though - architectural discussion, compiler implementation, possible type system extensions, library design, all are good subjects. Great work! I look forward to participating sometime in the near future. In that case, for people who need to know how to use monads so that they can do IO, why not create a #haskell-beginners channel? I have occasionally read posts of some users who were hesitant to participate in #haskell until they learned enough to keep up with the discussions there. If neither #haskell nor #haskell-in-depth is appropriate, perhaps they would feel more comfortable in a Haskell-beginners-specific channel? Asking any Haskell-related question at any level is appropriate in #haskell, now as always. One of the implicit goals of the new channel is to minimize such intimidation. The explicit goal of the new channel is to increase the newbie friendliness of #haskell. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: #haskell-in-depth IRC channel
We explicitly want to avoid a newbie trap See the summary of the discussion that lead to the channel creation http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/IRC_channel/Phase_2 -- Don DekuDekuplex: On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:15:48 +, Philippa Cowderoy fli...@flippac.org wrote: [...] If you need to know how to use monads so you can do IO, #haskell-in-depth isn't the place. On the other hand, if you want to discuss how Haskell's monads compare to the category theory or what the category theory can tell us about how individual monads relate to the language as a whole, -in-depth is a good place! In particular, we're hoping that the kind of category theory discussions that give the mistaken impression you actually need to know CT will increasingly live in #haskell-in-depth. We're not after a theory channel though - architectural discussion, compiler implementation, possible type system extensions, library design, all are good subjects. Great work! I look forward to participating sometime in the near future. In that case, for people who need to know how to use monads so that they can do IO, why not create a #haskell-beginners channel? I have occasionally read posts of some users who were hesitant to participate in #haskell until they learned enough to keep up with the discussions there. If neither #haskell nor #haskell-in-depth is appropriate, perhaps they would feel more comfortable in a Haskell-beginners-specific channel? -- Benjamin L. Russell -- Benjamin L. Russell / DekuDekuplex at Yahoo dot com http://dekudekuplex.wordpress.com/ Translator/Interpreter / Mobile: +011 81 80-3603-6725 Furuike ya, kawazu tobikomu mizu no oto. -- Matsuo Basho^ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
