thinking of switching...

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

thinking of switching...

serialhex
so, as the title suggests, i'm think ing of switching to xmonad for my wm...
 my Q is:  how much haskell do i need to know to use it effectively?  at the
moment i am pre-alpha grasshopper status in my haskell coding skills, (i
know haskell exists and is high on my list of languages to learn) though i
don't want to have to become a haskell guru in order to be able to use
xmonad.  so really, what's the learning curve like to start using xmonad?
hex

--
my blog is cooler than yours: serialhex.github.com

The wise man said: "Never argue with an idiot. They bring you down to their
level and beat you with experience."

> > Other than the fact Linux has a cool name, could someone explain why I
> > should use Linux over BSD?
>
> No.  That's it.  The cool name, that is.  We worked very hard on
> creating a name that would appeal to the majority of people, and it
> certainly paid off: thousands of people are using linux just to be able
> to say "OS/2? Hah.  I've got Linux.  What a cool name".  386BSD made the
> mistake of putting a lot of numbers and weird abbreviations into the
> name, and is scaring away a lot of people just because it sounds too
> technical.
        -- Linus Torvalds' follow-up to a question about Linux
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/xmonad/attachments/20110907/1973ea5c/attachment.htm>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

thinking of switching...

Allan Wind
On 2011-09-07 17:01:55, serialhex wrote:
> my Q is:  how much haskell do i need to know to use it effectively?  at the
> moment i am pre-alpha grasshopper status in my haskell coding skills, (i
> know haskell exists and is high on my list of languages to learn) though i
> don't want to have to become a haskell guru in order to be able to use
> xmonad.  so really, what's the learning curve like to start using xmonad?

It depends what you want to do, of course.

I am happy with my 19 line configuration file constructed by
reviewing the excellent documentation and I think a couple of web
searches.  No prior knowledge of Haskell and next to none now.  

Why not give a try and see how it goes?


/Allan
--
Allan Wind
Life Integrity, LLC
<http://lifeintegrity.com>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

thinking of switching...

Norbert Zeh
Allan Wind [2011.09.07 1741 -0400]:

> On 2011-09-07 17:01:55, serialhex wrote:
> > my Q is:  how much haskell do i need to know to use it effectively?  at the
> > moment i am pre-alpha grasshopper status in my haskell coding skills, (i
> > know haskell exists and is high on my list of languages to learn) though i
> > don't want to have to become a haskell guru in order to be able to use
> > xmonad.  so really, what's the learning curve like to start using xmonad?
>
> It depends what you want to do, of course.
>
> I am happy with my 19 line configuration file constructed by
> reviewing the excellent documentation and I think a couple of web
> searches.  No prior knowledge of Haskell and next to none now.  
>
> Why not give a try and see how it goes?

I second that.  I know Haskell reasonably well by now (it's my #1
language for any project where I don't have a good reason to use
something else) but I would consider most of my 267-line xmonad.hs to be
little more than specifying configuration options that happen to be
written in Haskell but whose meaning should be clear even to people
without any knowledge of Haskell.

You need to know more Haskell if you want to do stuff that's currently
not in core xmonad or in the quite extensive xmonadcontrib extension
library (that's why my xmonad.hs is so long).  But then, since you say
Haskell is high on your list of languages to learn, once you reach the
point that you'd be interested in a feature that's currently not there,
trying to implement this feature may just be the right kind of toy
project to get your feet wet and dig a little deeper into the language.

One thing that I can see to be a bit of a challenge is to get the types
of things in your configuration file right.  When I started using
xmonad, I was constantly bitten by trying to bind pure functions that
manipulate the window list of a workspace to a key, while a key can only
be bound to an action in the X monad.  However, if you run into any
issues like that, there's always the mailing list ;) and it doesn't take
too long to get a hang of it.

I came to xmonad from awesome 3 years ago.  I was quite hooked on
awesome back then but had enough when it segfaulted on me when working
to meet a conference deadline.  So I was looking for something more
stable and with similar functionality, found xmonad, and it didn't crash
on me once in these 3 years.  The Haskell compiler being so anal about
lots of things, including types checking out, is I think a big part of
why xmonad is so stable.

Cheers,
Norbert


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

thinking of switching...

Eyal Erez
I don't know Haskell very well at all.  Although I am a developer (mostly
Python and Java).  I find Haskell's syntax annoyingly confusing.  However, I
have a pretty extensive and very customized xmonad.hs file.  I was able to
create it by reading documentation, and asking the xmonad mailing list many
many specific questions.  And the investment has been well worth it.  The
community around xmonad is fantastic. It's really active, and very
responsive and supportive.

I won't lie, it does take some time and effort, but I was able to get xmonad
to work _exactly_ the way I want to.

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 21:22, Norbert Zeh <nzeh at cs.dal.ca> wrote:

> Allan Wind [2011.09.07 1741 -0400]:
> > On 2011-09-07 17:01:55, serialhex wrote:
> > > my Q is:  how much haskell do i need to know to use it effectively?  at
> the
> > > moment i am pre-alpha grasshopper status in my haskell coding skills,
> (i
> > > know haskell exists and is high on my list of languages to learn)
> though i
> > > don't want to have to become a haskell guru in order to be able to use
> > > xmonad.  so really, what's the learning curve like to start using
> xmonad?
> >
> > It depends what you want to do, of course.
> >
> > I am happy with my 19 line configuration file constructed by
> > reviewing the excellent documentation and I think a couple of web
> > searches.  No prior knowledge of Haskell and next to none now.
> >
> > Why not give a try and see how it goes?
>
> I second that.  I know Haskell reasonably well by now (it's my #1
> language for any project where I don't have a good reason to use
> something else) but I would consider most of my 267-line xmonad.hs to be
> little more than specifying configuration options that happen to be
> written in Haskell but whose meaning should be clear even to people
> without any knowledge of Haskell.
>
> You need to know more Haskell if you want to do stuff that's currently
> not in core xmonad or in the quite extensive xmonadcontrib extension
> library (that's why my xmonad.hs is so long).  But then, since you say
> Haskell is high on your list of languages to learn, once you reach the
> point that you'd be interested in a feature that's currently not there,
> trying to implement this feature may just be the right kind of toy
> project to get your feet wet and dig a little deeper into the language.
>
> One thing that I can see to be a bit of a challenge is to get the types
> of things in your configuration file right.  When I started using
> xmonad, I was constantly bitten by trying to bind pure functions that
> manipulate the window list of a workspace to a key, while a key can only
> be bound to an action in the X monad.  However, if you run into any
> issues like that, there's always the mailing list ;) and it doesn't take
> too long to get a hang of it.
>
> I came to xmonad from awesome 3 years ago.  I was quite hooked on
> awesome back then but had enough when it segfaulted on me when working
> to meet a conference deadline.  So I was looking for something more
> stable and with similar functionality, found xmonad, and it didn't crash
> on me once in these 3 years.  The Haskell compiler being so anal about
> lots of things, including types checking out, is I think a big part of
> why xmonad is so stable.
>
> Cheers,
> Norbert
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmonad mailing list
> xmonad at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/xmonad
>



--
*Eyal Erez <**oneself at gmail.com* <oneself at gmail.com>*>*

There are 10 types of people, those who know binary and those who don't.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/xmonad/attachments/20110930/42744dbc/attachment.htm>