The 22/11/11, Piyush P Kurur wrote:
Many here will agree to almost all the points that you raised about Haskell. However the way the you introdued might have irked some.
I'm sorry about that. Poor circumstances might give this wrong impression.
Here is how one would go about suggesting such a changes:
"Hi folks I was interested to know whether implementing rollbacks like NixOS is interesting for people here. Since I feel that C is too low level as a first step I am attempting a port of pacman to Haskell. The code is available under darcs at http://somewhere.org/me/ Patches are welcome. The current version does nothign but prints package meta info.
Regards
me"
Notice I'm not the OP show suggested porting pacman to Haskell. I came into this thread after the facts and tried hard to make the original suggestion as a part of the larger POV in favor of high-level languages. Also, I don't want to flame and rather keep the discussion out of free attacks against the current team of developers. I took part of this thread only because I've already been faced to pacman limitations in its current form. -- Nicolas Sebrecht