[Haskell-cafe] Cabal or stack in 2021 ?

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Arch Linux has broken ghc installation as package maintener has some weird ideas…
You have to install it via soirces and avoid Arch packagases like plague.

Greetings, Branimir.

> On 28.09.2021., at 10:00, Alexis Praga <alexis.praga at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> Small feedback in case it’s useful:
> 
> Switching from stack to cabal was painless with ghcup. I could not make it work without it (some dependencies failed to compile on Archlinux). 
> 
> Alexis Praga 
> 
>> Le 18 sept. 2021 à 21:07, coot at coot.me a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Alexis,
>> 
>> There are several reasons:
>> 
>> * reproducible nix style local builds.  By specifying hackage index one can build against the same set of packages locally and on CI.
>> * has access to whole hackage, though at times requires a bit of thought, most of the time it works just fine.
>> * `cabal.project` and `cabal.project.local`: the first corresponds to `stack.yaml`, the other does not have a counter part in stack.  For example, this is very useful, when one wants to modify ghc options per package, e.g. adding or removing `-Werror` ghc option, or configuring a ghc plugin
>> * some options work better than in stack. One example is `--allow-newer`.
>> * one can experiment with backpack,
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Marcin
>> 
>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>> 
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On Saturday, September 18th, 2021 at 20:52, Alexis Praga <alexis.praga at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> As an intermediate beginner, I've been back into Haskell for the last
>>> months for a small project, using stack as the building tool.
>>> 
>>> Why stack ? A few years back, I learned that it was the "best" way to build
>>> projects to avoid "cabal hell", which I understood at the time as
>>> "managing dependencies with cabal is hard".
>>> 
>>> As such, I've use stack since and have been quite happy with it. The
>>> only drawback is that building a project can be quite long.
>>> 
>>> This is usually not a problem, except for writing Haskell scripts using
>>> shelly (for example), where the stack layout is a bit impractical for
>>> fast-paced development. A solution is to use `runghc` or a script
>>> interpreter [1].
>>> 
>>> However, I've seen some projects where cabal is used to build directly
>>> instead of cabal, so it looks like the situation improved.
>>> 
>>> My question is this: in 2021, is there a reason to switch back to cabal ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> [1] https://www.fpcomplete.com/haskell/tutorial/stack-script/ <https://www.fpcomplete.com/haskell/tutorial/stack-script/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>>    Alexis Praga  
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20210928/51a9c638/attachment.html>