But I don't want Perl, I want a well designed language and well designed libraries. I think it's find to let libraries proliferate, but at some point you also need to step back and abstract.
-- Lennart On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 9:46 PM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > andrewcoppin: >> What *I* propose is that somebody [you see what I did there?] should sit >> down, take stock of all the multitudes of array libraries, what features >> they have, what obvious features they're missing, and think up a good >> API from scratch. Once we figure out what the best way to arrange all >> this stuff is, *then* we attack the problem of implementing it for real. >> >> It seems lots of people have written really useful code, but we need to >> take a step back and look at the big picture here before writing any >> more of it. > > No. > > My view would be to let the free market of developers decide what is > best. No bottlenecks -- there's too many Haskell libraries already (~1000 > now). > > And this approach has yielded more code than ever before, more libraries > than ever before, and library authors are competing. > > So let the market decide. We're a bazaar, not a cathedral. > > -- Don > _______________________________________________ > 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
