Show HN: IHP v1.0 – Batteries-included web framework built on Haskell and Nix (opens in new tab)

The IDE is mostly designed as an extension to an editor heavy workflow (e.g. I use Sublime + VIM to build IHP itself). So it's unlikely to work well with a Chromebook. A workaround might be to use the GitPod integration for a web based code editor.

The IDE is btw entirely optional and everything can be done via code. E.g. all operations done via the visual Schema Designer are saved in the Application/Schema.sql file. That file can be edited from a code editor as you want. All operations in the schema designer operate on the AST of the parsed Schema.sql file.

Here is more feedback. Installation of everything is a little bit hairy... It didn't work in my fish shell but I had to switch to zsh to make it work...

When you edit database, instead of waiting for you to click update, maybe you can prompt user after update... "Do you want to run migrations?"

Small things like that.

Overall I love functional aspects of it and will be playing more in days to come.

IHP is really easy to package with nix nowadays. In fact the official docker building also just uses `pkgs.dockerTools.buildImage` and calls nix-build :) Most people with nix experience can easily figure out how to do exactly the same thing as the "official" way.

Thanks for the feedback. I am definitely a beginner in Haskell, which would explain why I came to this conclusion. Could you recommend some good sources on testing in Haskell?

Haskell's QuickCheck, AFAIK the first prominent implementation of property-based testing, gained its popularity partly because it eliminated a good part of the tedium by inferring the sampling strategies from the types (which in idiomatic Haskell are, due to liberal use of opaque type synonyms, often quite a bit more specific than in any other non-dependently-typed language I've seen). Which does not free the programmer from writing down the properties themselves—in that respect your objection is valid—, but IME still makes it quite a bit more ergonomic than e.g. Python's otherwise functionally equivalent Hypothesis.

> Having strong typing doesn't magically do formal validation on your logic

There are plugins for Haskell and dependently typed languages that go much further in the ‘if it compiles, it is formally validated’, but that’s a lot more work; there is a trade-off for now or you will be stuck. Your ‘run of the mill’ tests also don’t formally validate your logic (not even close usually). Our types, even if static, are usually too loose and our type systems not powerful enough; writing tests helps to close the gap between practical and theoretical but a lot more can be done semi-automatically (and will be I hope).

Same. Thus far its been pretty easy to follow along and I haven't ran into any show stopping issues.

The jsx seem not to have highlighting or completions?