>And what exactly stops your one-to-rule-them-all from just becoming yet another one?

We are not discussing here what tool is the best and try to mandate everyone to use it. We are discussing how to efficiently use the scarce development resources (time, money) for the benefit of haskell community.

It does not matter if the specific tool will succeed in adoption or not. Trying to create one is still the best course of action.

>Build a consensus *first*

The consensus is already there. It is obvious the demand for such tool is high, hence many (failed) attempts. Failed because of the lack of resources and coordination.

>As far as I can see, it is based on wishful thinking alone.

I already pointed at existing successful implementations (clojure's nrepl and lisps slime-swank). If they can do it, so can we.


On Monday, March 10, 2014 10:05:41 AM UTC-7, Brandon Allbery wrote:

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Vagif Verdi <vagif...@gmail.com> wrote:

>there's already hdevtools

There you go. Another one! See what i'm saying? So much wasted effort and a dozen of half baked programs all of which implement low hanging fruit of the same set of basic features and have no resources left to deliver truly powerful and polished capabilities. 

And what exactly stops your one-to-rule-them-all from just becoming yet another one? (Or: what exactly means that the world will flock to your proposal instead of continuing to do what it already does?) As far as I can see, it is based on wishful thinking alone.

Build a consensus *first* and make sure you're serving everyone else's needs and that everyone else is interested. Otherwise you end up with https://xkcd.com/927/.

--

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates

allb...@gmail.com                                  ball...@sinenomine.net

unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net