Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla

[Jani Monoses]

 > Please confirm it's possible to compile darcs, and which compiler you
> used.  I heard recently that darcs is strongly dependent on Hugs98,
> which is an interpreter.  Seemed a little odd (Haskell98 is a
> well-defined language, and Hugs doesn't have all that much in the way
> of extensions), but that's what I heard.

Darcs is compiled with the glasgow haskell compiler. I think it was assufiled too who said 
in another thread that it's one of the best optimizing compilers, and that darcs is slow 
for other reasons.

>     Catalin> While darcs is a nice research project, my recommendation
>     Catalin> would be to stay with arch, at least until you hear
>     Catalin> somebody happily using darcs with a huge source tree like
>     Catalin> the Linux kernel.
>
> I wouldn't go so far as that, but certainly I'd say to investigate
> experience with a tree 3X as big as your current one, to give room to
> grow while darcs does!

Agreed.If your project is nothing like the linux kernel darcs is a viable 
alternative.