| 12 Apr 2024 |
 maralorn | It is not a drop in replacement for nix. | 08:00:04 |
| maralorn | It does not support all nix commands. | 08:01:48 |
| maralorn | And tabcompletion is worse. | 08:02:06 |
| maralorn | So making it the standard would be problematic. | 08:02:31 |
 @shalokshalom:kde.org | i see | 08:03:32 |
| maralorn | * Replacing the nix command by nom is an unsolved problem. | 08:04:07 |
| maralorn | Besides that recommend away it's nearly always the better choice IMO. | 08:05:00 |
| @shalokshalom:kde.org | Considering those are the only two reasons, I think 'not being able to support all commands' can be solved by simply doing a fallback | 08:14:41 |
| @shalokshalom:kde.org | and tabcompletion would remain as the only holdback? | 08:14:59 |
| @shalokshalom:kde.org | Probably showing my ignorance here, but are the auto completions even different from nix? wouldnt you be able to inherit them from nix? | 08:17:42 |
| maralorn | In reply to @shalokshalom:kde.org
Considering those are the only two reasons, I think 'not being able to support all commands' can be solved by simply doing a fallback Yes, there is an issue about that. | 08:18:22 |
| maralorn | In reply to @shalokshalom:kde.org
Probably showing my ignorance here, but are the auto completions even different from nix? wouldnt you be able to inherit them from nix? Basically yes. I just don't know how to. | 08:19:12 |
| @shalokshalom:kde.org | I do this with my shell, but I guess this is no option here :p | 08:21:50 |
| @shalokshalom:kde.org | Also: Congratulations for breaking the mythological spell, and producing something useful with Haskell :D | 08:23:14 |
