On 5 August 2010 16:48, Gregory Crosswhite <gcr...@phys.washington.edu> wrote: > On 8/4/10 11:40 PM, Andrew Coppin wrote: >> >> Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: >>> >>> Don't forget, GHC is open source: if this lack really was "dumb" and >>> annoying you, there was nothing stopping you from rectifying this >>> situation up until now. >> >> Except that, in the real world, this is actually completely infeasible. >> Yes, I know it's the basic tenant of OSS that you can modify the program to >> do whatever you want. But in reality, something like GHC is far too large >> and complex for this to be a realistic possibility. And this holds for most >> other nontrivial software too. > > Fair enough, but if one can't do better one's self then one should be > careful about calling the work of others "dumb", which was the original > point.
Exactly. Either do it yourself or be grateful that someone has done _something_, even if it isn't as good as you like. It's not like you're paying for it... -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
