I second Simon's words. I didn't read the previous thread, nor will I, so I have no idea what happened with your suggestion.
The Haskell Foundation is primed to work toward solving some of the problems with the standard library.
FWIW, your suggested operation is a
primitive operation of the Extend/Comonad type-class called
duplicate, though this is not in the standard libraries.
Ignat Thanks for writing. You are just the sort of person that ought to feel welcome, and able to contribute. That you have not felt that way is a failure. I'd like to suggest another explanation to the three you offer (none of which I subscribe to). 4. The now-very-large Haskell ecosystem runs on the efforts of busy volunteers, all of whom have day jobs. However well-meaning or high-minded we are, things will be left undone, or done less well than we aspire to. I hope and believe that the Haskell Foundation will help with this challenge. I don’t think it'll be a silver bullet. But it should help; and making volunteers such as you feel both welcome and able to contribute meaningfully is certainly a major goal. | Haskell has not only made me a programmer — it defined me as a person. | There is no other language and no other community like this one. I have | reverence. Is it the same for anyone else here? Or should I, rather, grow | up and move on? Please don't grow up and move on! We are working together to build not just a language to be proud of, but a community we can flourish in. We will stumble for sure, but if we are humble, respectful of each other, and willing to keep trying, I think we can succeed. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Libraries <libraries-bounces@haskell.org> On Behalf Of Ignat | Insarov | Sent: 16 February 2021 21:57 | To: Carter Schonwald <carter.schonwald@gmail.com> | Cc: Haskell Libraries <libraries@haskell.org> | Subject: Re: Proposal: Expanding the CLC | | Carter's words touched me. Ever neither smart nor silent, I am going to | be a little loud once more. | | Being an outside spectator of this venue, a beneficiary _(one of | innumerably many)_ of the work being inconspicuously done by the persons | present, and a skilled developer that potentially may shoulder some of | the burden, I would really like to understand better the structure of | power and the philosophy behind the CLC enterprise — it is not | observable, therefore I cannot decide who to be thankful to and whether | my participation is reasonably warranted. I know there are people that do | a huge amount of work continuously fixing a vaguely defined cloud of | _«core»_ packages — but I also know these people have no idea that I | exist, from which it follows that my needs and wishes are respected only | accidentally. | | I am voicing this thought for these reasons: | | * I am a small scale commercial Haskell user — on its face it classifies | me as | the target audience. I am invested into Haskell but not a luminary like | those | others present here — rather an ordinary person, an average. In some | way this | makes me a representative example. | | * I am somewhat altruistic. I contribute open source code, answer | questions | about Haskell and even help people privately without mercantile aims. | This | suggests that I should want to participate in an effort that is | beneficial to | many — being an altruist, I may as well be an effective one. | | If there is a person that should be caught in the wave, that is me here. | But it is very evident that I am not. The story is that I asked `\x → (x, | x)` to be given a place in standard libraries — hard to find a more | innocent proposition. As some know, it did not go well. _(This is not an | only example but the most striking.)_ There are several possible | explanations. | | 1. This is meritocracy at work. Haskell collects some of the most gifted | programmers of the world. A mere mortal cannot possibly suggest any | beneficial change to `base` or `containers` or `vector` or `cabal- | install` — | in all likelihood it was already considered by the wise council. | | 2. The philosophy is unclear and undisputed. For example, it was | suggested to me | in private correspondence that the reason the standard libraries are | not | being extended more often is because exporting more names is wrong. | This is | of course as valid a principle as any — but I do not see it being | spelled out | and considered on the basis of evidence. Perhaps the wizards of code | are not | that good at other things, like being clear about their design goals. | | 3. The power structure is set up in favour of a specific invisible group | that | sets the tune. Recall the story about Stack and Cabal. It had been | shown | clearly that the interests of the community at large are not | represented in | the group of maintainers of Cabal. It is hard to triangulate from the | distance what exactly went wrong, but on the basis of the meager | evidence | that I can have, the theory is plausible, and evidence keeps adding | up. | | There is also a question of who selects the libraries to be called | _«core»_. For example, Stack _(and, consequently, half the user base of | Haskell)_ depends on `rio`, and `typed-process` is a superiour | replacement for `process`. Should the _«core»_ include packages vital to | half the user base? Should it include a superiour replacement of a | morally obsolete package? Or is it a place where leviathans of the past | come to die? What does it entail for a package to be considered _«core»_? | Does it get included in the standard distribution? What sort of packages | should we like to distribute? | | Finally, there is a question of high principles. Haskell can be a | pragmatic tool of the trade or a paragon of elegance, rock-solid or | bleeding edge… maybe even all of it at once, but what does the | _management_ want it to be? What do you folks dream of? What is your | ideal? I cannot see any — I only see reactive efforts to fend off the | inevitably approaching future. No one would be inspired by that. I | suspect there are a few people that get paid to contribute to Haskell. | Maybe that should be the main motive instead? Maybe it is time to say | that Haskell is a commercial language maintained by corporate employees? | I would not like to be one but at least expectations would be aligned. | | Haskell has not only made me a programmer — it defined me as a person. | There is no other language and no other community like this one. I have | reverence. Is it the same for anyone else here? Or should I, rather, grow | up and move on? | _______________________________________________ | Libraries mailing list | Libraries@haskell.org | https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.has | kell.org%2Fcgi- | bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flibraries&data=04%7C01%7Csimonpj%40microso | ft.com%7C7f7bb62c42ac43639d6a08d8d2c5c706%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011d | b47%7C1%7C0%7C637491094192227676%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAw | MDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=VxR73 | 6V5TUUf%2B0OfzlBAQK9GG1CpaiBZahvqtiE7obM%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries