Is this project dead about sudbury HOT 3 OPEN

Ah, that makes sense! Thanks for the translation :-)

At the moment I am not personally planning to continue development, since it's not putting bread on the table and not publishing papers. I started the project because I wanted to know how far I could push the idea of systems programming in a lazy functional setting, and to a large extent this goal was fulfilled. I have no immediate use case for this project at the moment.

However, I do believe that there is a gap in the market to be filled by something such as this project, namely a binary-compatible alternative implementation of the wayland protocol that allows lower-level access to the protocol. Such lower-level access can be used to analyze and stress test the wayland protocol. I'm not sure this would necessarily need to be written in Haskell, although it is very satisfying to see that it is possible in principle. Of course, there is the prospect of Haskell-based compositors akin to XMonad, but I don't think there is a watertight argument for using Haskell in the library dependencies there. If you are writing "ordinary" wayland software in Haskell (i.e. windowed clients or graphical compositors connected to a display), it would probably make sense to FFI to existing higher-level wayland libraries.

from sudbury.

There's something aggressive about this question. What am I, as an author, supposed to do with a project that I am currently not working on?

from sudbury.

I think he'd just like to know if you have any plans for this project in the future :)

from sudbury.