3 ms·
> Maintenance timesink might easily outweigh the gain in development time. That is correct. However, in Haskell you need a lot of discipline to guide a big pro
by progman 9y ago
> Maintenance timesink might easily outweigh the gain in development time.
That is correct. However, in Haskell you need a lot of discipline to guide a big project in the right direction. Maintenance can quickly became a nightmare due to very dense code.
If maintenance is the main issue I would choose Ada than Haskell. I have no problem to understand my own Ada code written 10 years ago, even without documentation. In Haskell however I had problems to understand my own code which was just some weeks old :-)
- tome 9y ago> That is correct. However, in Haskell you need a lot of discipline to guide a big project in the right direction. Maintenance can quickly became a nightmare due to very dense code. Have you worked with Haskell professionally? Your observations do not match my experience of approx. 3 years of professional Haskell development across 3 different companies. Guiding the growth of Haskell codebases is trivial compared to Python, which is the other language I have professional experience of.
- progman 9y ago> Have you worked with Haskell professionally? Not yet. I was seriously interested in Haskell. The cabal hell however put me back. Stack is interesting but installation from source is still troublesome. I always want to be able to install my developer tools from scratch (by source only) since I want to make sure that I can port my software to new systems. Haskell's and Rust's way of installation (curl | sh) is convenient but inacceptable for porting. Nim's bootstrap from source (no dependencies except a C compiler) is the right way how it should be.
- dom96 9y agoThat's cool to hear. Except that we now offer an install method similar to Rust via a tool called choosenim.