Re: [Haskell-cafe] The Lisp Curse

it can involve several qualified imports and time researching ByteStrings/Lazy ByteStrings/ByteString.Char8

Evan is right, the right way is to use the text package (plus, it is part of the platform and is simple to use), or at least the utf8-string package (encode/decode functions). I personnaly banned ByteString.Char8, as it is incompatible with UTF8 (the "pack" method truncates Chars). 2011/5/20 Eric Rasmussen

I only recently started learning Haskell and have had a difficult time convincing other Python hackers to come on board. I see two things that might help:

1) A resource to make informed decisions about different libraries. Something that includes specific criteria like how long a library has been out, how often it's maintained, how many people use it, etc. Ideally you'd be able to see a quick table comparison of features across libraries that perform similar tasks (roughly translated to something like: "this xml library is well established, has great documentation, and works for most parsing tasks, while this other one is much faster but not widely used yet").

2) Languages like Python make it easy to write fast performing code in a few lines that will read/write files, split strings, and build lists or dictionaries/associative arrays. There are very clever ways of doing all these things Haskell, but it can involve several qualified imports and time researching ByteStrings/Lazy ByteStrings/ByteString.Char8. It would be nice to have a single module that exports some common text operations via ByteStrings without requiring a lot of upfront research time learning to work with ByteStrings, and possibly a limited export of Data.Map features as well.

The second one would hold little interest for advanced developers of course, but when someone is faced with a difficult learning task, if you give them a strong starting point that produces results it can help motivate them to keep learning. Is anyone working on either of these things or interested in working on them? I'm not quite ready to produce high quality Haskell code yet, but I'd like to contribute if I can.

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:42 PM, David Leimbach wrote:

...

See the Haskell Platform.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 19, 2011, at 1:56 PM, Andrew Coppin wrote:

...

On 19/05/2011 09:34 PM, vagif.verdi@gmail.com wrote:

...

Andrew, you are being non constructive.

It seems I'm being misunderstood.

Some people seem to hold the opinion that more libraries = better. I'm trying to voice the opinion that there is such a thing as too many libraries. The article I linked to explains part of why this is the case, in a better way than I've been able to phrase it myself.

I'm not trying to say "OMG, the way it is now completely sucks!" I'm not trying to say "you must do X right now!" I'm just trying to put forward an opinion. The opinion that having too many libraries can be a problem, which some people don't seem to agree with. (Obviously it isn't *always* bad, I'm just saying that sometimes it can be.)

That's all I was trying to say.

_______________________________________________ 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

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe