zeptomu

> If using GPLv2 means companies stay away from the project instead of building on top of it, that's not a win for anyone.

Like companies staying away from Linux or GCC? It's debatable if these projects would have been as successful using MIT/BSD.

My advice for people (who want to use SSH on Windows) is to install Git which ships with Git Bash and SSH.

No, the data is from official government sources. OSM data is good, but mostly not that good in comparison with official sources.

These might be reasonable functions to implement in a standard library, so having them it makes sense to use them. I rather feared Idris does not have some IO abstraction (reading/writing) files at all. Maybe I am conflating languages and libraries here, but they often go hand in hand.

My practicability expectations for languages implementing dependent types are pretty low.

> [...] aren't UNIX applications

What kind of argument is that - so what?

All major Linux distributions are doing very well with systemd and it makes sense to have some kind of supervizor service (or collection of tools) on top of `init`. You can still tie together your applications with shell scripts and not run systemd. Since systemd it is simpler to admin different linux boxes - at least that is my personal experience - before that every distribution shipped their own shell scripts.

Systemd is fine and if it is so inferior to simple POSIX applications glued together, people should provide a better alternative. The grieve that people have against Lennart is overblown - we should thank him for his contributions.

Wow, thanks for the response - that actually looks like Haskell and if its performance is not that abysmal (let's say slower than Python), that is pretty cool.

This actually looks quite reasonable - usage string included, I like it. Hats off to you, I will try to compile it to a binary now and do some benchmarking.

Yeah ... but how does that look? A "naive" wc implementation (counting the character '\n') is <50 lines of code (if we have modern file IO in the standard library) in a practical PL.

But maybe there is a too big difference between the concept of "files" (as seen by OS developers that view them as a byte-blob in a hierarchical name system) and language designers that want to represent a file as a collection of lines (and probably would like your command line interpreter not allow to call "wc" on a file that contains non UTF8 encoded data) - but this is still a pretty big step for our current computation environment (where I can call programs by name that are also files).

For many people (including me) a "practical" programming language needs an implementation that can generate (compile) an executable or interpret a file representation of its source. Otherwise its a proof assistant.

Maybe we have to merge the concept of data in terms (no pun indented) of bytes (types?) in-memory and collections of bits and bytes that have a lifetime longer than the program (if it's not a daemon)?

Do you mind sharing your SAAS?

> In addition subtitles, secondary audio, descriptive video, and multi-view video etc. are all things which we mandate by law which do not work well in a file base expierenced.

That's just not true - VLC has many more features than all the web-based (or "app"-based) popular streaming players. Granted, I checked and my VLC does not have "thumbnail scrubbing", but although that is nice, I don't think this is a big deal and if it's really popular, it will be added to VLC (or it may already be there, I did not check).

> [...], but is that it.

Yes.

I guess people would even pay for Spotify, if it's DRM free (which means the stuff on it can be copied), but that is still considered "radical" (in the Overton window) for shareholders of media distributors.

That "Save your music offline" is a feature in 2019 is ridiculous.