i think @GabrielG439 said this in a talk once and i've found it a useful thing to remember sometimes:
> Cabal was built for managing packages (a single package) whereas Stack was built more for managing *projects*, that is, a collection of packages
-
I know you beat this particular horse to death but stack has always worked for me when I need it, and I do use Nix.
Well, the horse is beating itself to death. I don't go out of my way to care about stack, yet there it is, breaking constantly for beginners. You'll see, there'll be one at the next FP course, there always is, "It's not working, why? By the way, I used stack."
-
-
The root problem here is that neither Stack nor Cabal had a formal requirements gathering phase like Nix did in Eelco's thesis. As a result, nobody can say for certain whether Stack/Cabal "work" if there is no specification for what it means for them to "work"
-
Right, so I mean, I have to fart around with a beginner who choses to use stack, almost every time. With cabal, there is zero farting around when configured correctly. I acknowledge doing that is difficult, but it is necessary.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.