i see, but my statement does not become false because of it. his agent pushes several commits an hour in a continuous loop, meaning this respected developer is not involved in the process at all.
He wore out the vim movement keys on a mac laptop keyboard in four months.
By "wore out" I mean he had worn the plastic down to the keyswitches, in FOUR MONTHS.
We once had an emergency production outage and Kmett got more productive as he stayed up later. At about 36 hours he fixed the problem. I fell over asleep, he fixed other problems he'd found during the investigation.
I have lots more Ed stories, but this output you question does not surprise me.
Please continue telling them
I can promise you he will not produce and release "slop". He would be an order of magnitude more offended at the idea than you are, I'd imagine.
He completed undergrad and graduate programs in math, computer science, and a special program in ai all simultaneously in 3 years. I believe he was finishing programs before his scholarships could kick in.
...and this still understates his impact on Haskell, he helped shape how a lot of programs are written in Haskell through some of the stuff he worked on (see e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/a/2769840 as evidence of his influence on core functionality).
In the original commenter's defense, I _did_ let the agents I have working on this get a more than a bit test harness crazy back when I was able to use GHC itself as a behavioral oracle. That worked fine through the initial build out, but then it rushed ahead with a broken CI due to misalignment in priorities, and then kept piling fixtures on top of fixtures and didn't properly track their cross-dependencies. My work on this in the last 48 hours has mostly been about getting that part under control and stable across my target platforms so I have better bedrock to build atop.