4 ms·
Haskell sucks because mutability and strictness are extremely important for writing large complex programs, and Haskell deliberately makes both of these things
by denim_chicken 10y ago
Haskell sucks because mutability and strictness are extremely important for writing large complex programs, and Haskell deliberately makes both of these things inconvenient.
Also, Haskell's ecosystem and tooling is still crappy, probably because writing complex programs in Haskell needlessly difficult (due to laziness and immutability).
And the "type-safety" guarantees are a red herring. They are not that useful in practice.
- tome 10y ago> Haskell sucks because mutability and strictness are extremely important for writing large complex programs, and Haskell deliberately makes both of these things inconvenient. That's funny, because I'd say that immutability is essential for writing large on complex programs. Strictness, on the other hand, hmm, I can take it or leave it. > Haskell's ecosystem and tooling is still crappy No argument here. > because writing complex programs in Haskell needlessly difficult Argument here :) > And the "type-safety" guarantees are a red herring. They are not that useful in practice. I've found the opposite. Type safety has saved me so many headaches I'm never going back.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- denim_chicken 10y agoWell, I can't say much other than that I encourage everyone to try Haskell for themselves and form their own opinion -- if they can find the time to get over the language's extremely steep learning curve.