<commit_before>You can edit everything, without registration. (But if you delete everything, I'll roll it back and then make a voodoo doll of you and stick some needles into it).

The most important rule is: **it's collaborative notes, not Wikipedia**. In other words, incomplete entries like this are welcome here:

> **pros:** pretty nice API\
> **cons:** buggy (see an example on my Github, here's the link)

Markdown is supported in most places. 2 noteworthy features: tou can write `[pkg](@hackage)` to get a link to package `pkg` on Hackage, and you can mark snippets of code with `repl` to show that they come from GHCi:

~~~~
~~~ haskell repl
> 2+2
4
~~~
~~~

Some additional guidelines/observations/etc that probably make sense:

  * sort pros/cons by importance

  * a library can be in several categories – list only pros/cons and examples that are relevant to the category

  * don't write about a library if it's worse than all other libraries and doesn't have *anything* that could make it the preferred choice in some situation

  * if you don't like something for any reason, edit it

  * if you're unsure about something, still write it (just warn others that you're unsure)

  * if you have useful information of any kind that doesn't fit, add it to the category notes

Finally, all content here is licensed under [CC BY-SA 3.0][] (it's the same license as on Wikipedia and Stackoverflow).

[CC BY-SA 3.0]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
<commit_msg>Minor fix<commit_after>You can edit everything, without registration. (But if you delete everything, I'll roll it back and then make a voodoo doll of you and stick some needles into it).

The most important rule is: **it's collaborative notes, not Wikipedia**. In other words, incomplete entries like this are welcome here:

> **pros:** pretty nice API\
> **cons:** buggy (see an example on my Github, here's the link)

Markdown is supported in most places. 2 noteworthy features: tou can write `[pkg](@hackage)` to get a link to package `pkg` on Hackage, and you can mark snippets of code with `repl` to show that they come from GHCi:

~~~~
~~~ haskell repl
> 2+2
4
~~~
~~~~

Some additional guidelines/observations/etc that probably make sense:

  * sort pros/cons by importance

  * a library can be in several categories – list only pros/cons and examples that are relevant to the category

  * don't write about a library if it's worse than all other libraries and doesn't have *anything* that could make it the preferred choice in some situation

  * if you don't like something for any reason, edit it

  * if you're unsure about something, still write it (just warn others that you're unsure)

  * if you have useful information of any kind that doesn't fit, add it to the category notes

Finally, all content here is licensed under [CC BY-SA 3.0][] (it's the same license as on Wikipedia and Stackoverflow).

[CC BY-SA 3.0]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.08055274688237277, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006740815638692282, 'mean_word_length': 4.152777777777778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 9, 'https://': 2, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
{'dir': 'git-commits-cleaned', 'id': '2431949', 'n_tokens_mistral': 860, 'n_tokens_neox': 786, 'n_words': 453}