Newest at the top
| 2025-03-01 00:50:52 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-01 00:49:12 +0100 | Sgeo_ | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:47:44 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:46:45 +0100 | Sgeo__ | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2025-03-01 00:44:40 +0100 | Sgeo_ | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2025-03-01 00:44:29 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> the reflex package was also updated last month |
| 2025-03-01 00:41:26 +0100 | Googulator79 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-14b2-c443-5a96-b49d-1dd5.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-03-01 00:41:13 +0100 | Googulator79 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-14b2-c443-5a96-b49d-1dd5.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-03-01 00:41:03 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> obsidian does direct work, but they also got screwed by being bound to 8.8 because of the old GHCJS being abandonware |
| 2025-03-01 00:40:34 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> https://hackage.haskell.org/package/reflex |
| 2025-03-01 00:39:28 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> actually they're doing better than i remembered |
| 2025-03-01 00:37:42 +0100 | <geekosaur> | not sure I'd call them mistakes considering their website suggests they have a decent number of commercial users |
| 2025-03-01 00:37:29 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> also iirc Obsidian had a business model of providing support for users, which isn't good for uptake |
| 2025-03-01 00:36:28 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> being lens/optics-based makes it dumb enough for commodity programmers, being cabal-based means that you don't require learning nix on top of everything else |
| 2025-03-01 00:36:00 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> overloaded the novelty budget |
| 2025-03-01 00:35:56 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> i'd see reflex's mistakes as being, #1, nix-bound, #2, FRP |
| 2025-03-01 00:35:41 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> reflex received an update in january |
| 2025-03-01 00:35:27 +0100 | remexre | (~remexre@user/remexre) remexre |
| 2025-03-01 00:35:07 +0100 | <geekosaur> | one would think so, but then one must ask why only obelisk did so and it's pretty much dead. I wonder if there's a "lessons from" somewhere |
| 2025-03-01 00:33:05 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> but is my hunch correct, that, say, there is value in being able to define your frontend and your backend at the same time? |
| 2025-03-01 00:32:39 +0100 | poscat | (~poscat@user/poscat) poscat |
| 2025-03-01 00:31:19 +0100 | poscat | (~poscat@user/poscat) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:30:07 +0100 | k_hachig_ | (~k_hachig@bras-base-toroon0247w-grc-123-70-29-50-103.dsl.bell.ca) k_hachig |
| 2025-03-01 00:30:05 +0100 | <geekosaur> | well, except ideally you don't want to have to statically compile in every backend |
| 2025-03-01 00:29:30 +0100 | dolio | (~dolio@130.44.140.168) dolio |
| 2025-03-01 00:28:30 +0100 | dolio | (~dolio@130.44.140.168) (Quit: ZNC 1.9.1 - https://znc.in) |
| 2025-03-01 00:27:32 +0100 | wootehfoot | (~wootehfoo@user/wootehfoot) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-03-01 00:26:05 +0100 | bilegeek | (~bilegeek@123.sub-174-228-103.myvzw.com) bilegeek |
| 2025-03-01 00:24:11 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> tbh i mean it's just free monad interpreter, but have different interpreter functions |
| 2025-03-01 00:20:54 +0100 | dolio | (~dolio@130.44.140.168) dolio |
| 2025-03-01 00:20:49 +0100 | bilegeek | (~bilegeek@2600:1008:b083:f9b:4ea6:8944:ad90:a41f) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:20:07 +0100 | Pozyomka | (~pyon@user/pyon) pyon |
| 2025-03-01 00:19:52 +0100 | Pozyomka | (~pyon@user/pyon) (Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1) |
| 2025-03-01 00:19:23 +0100 | dolio | (~dolio@130.44.140.168) (Quit: ZNC 1.9.1 - https://znc.in) |
| 2025-03-01 00:16:59 +0100 | fp | (~Thunderbi@87-92-155-24.rev.dnainternet.fi) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:16:44 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it's possible to pick a backend at runtime by using something like environment variables, but this turns out to require low level enough hackery that it has to be done in C/C++ even though conceptually it's just populating a struct of function pointers (because populating that struct requires dlopen/dlsym) |
| 2025-03-01 00:13:30 +0100 | __monty__ | (~toonn@user/toonn) (Quit: leaving) |
| 2025-03-01 00:12:32 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> i mean it can be done on a function level |
| 2025-03-01 00:11:49 +0100 | takuan | (~takuan@d8D86B601.access.telenet.be) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:10:06 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 2025-03-01 00:08:33 +0100 | michalz | (~michalz@185.246.207.222) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-03-01 00:07:40 +0100 | <c_wraith> | obelisk's trick is to change the libraries grabbed by a particular name depending on what it's targeting |
| 2025-03-01 00:07:08 +0100 | <c_wraith> | It doesn't *really* work that way, thanks to needing to compile eagerly |
| 2025-03-01 00:06:29 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> erm, don't have to evaluate the backend server actions |
| 2025-03-01 00:06:18 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> whereas you're looking at macros and tokens (which require ADTs to be remotely reasonable) in other languages |
| 2025-03-01 00:05:43 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> whereas in Haskell, due to lazy evaluation and a concept of action, you don't have to evaluate the datatype parts, and this is completely native and idiomatic to haskell (well, not the object aspect) |
| 2025-03-01 00:05:28 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-01 00:05:07 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> they have to be fully evaluated, or rendered as tokens |
| 2025-03-01 00:04:50 +0100 | <c_wraith> | But I think it's not really maintained anymore |
| 2025-03-01 00:04:46 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> because in a strict language, if you have the server components of objects |