.. a few people mention that they prefer the "global package database" style. I'd like to improve my understanding of why people prefer that style.
I had/have a strong preference for the global package database. a) teaching. no longer relevant but when it was beyond the points already raised: - simplified helping students when we were clearly using the same codebase - assessment: easier to set and advise when you know exactly what libraries/versions the class will be using. It was also easier to set up by passing code requirements to support staff before term. they would ensure tools and a list of required libraries were installed. b) research, - I often found it helpful to move between ghci and my program text, testing ideas or checking types in ghci then copying and pasting into the file - ghc-pkg plus the Haskell doc provided a usable and helpful foundation for work c) I saw no reason to try an alternative version of working nor any evidence that one would make my life any easier On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 5:58 PM Johannes Waldmann < johannes.waldmann@htwk-leipzig.de> wrote:
.. a few people mention that they prefer the "global package database" style. I'd like to improve my understanding of why people prefer that style.
Teaching.
Reduce storage, and save students the extra work and distraction. https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/7172
same question, with discussion of possible work-around with "shared local" database: https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/6515
I will need this in two week's time ..
- J.W. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
-- David Duke Emeritus Professor of Computer Science School of Computing University of Leeds UK E:duke.j.david@gmail.com W:https://engineering.leeds.ac.uk/staff/334/Professor_David_Duke