(2014 btw) This is all true about Ruby: the things that make it feel so powerful come at a big cost. But of course what the best solution is depends on what yo

(2014 btw) This is all true about Ruby: the things that make it feel so powerful come at a big cost. But of course what the best solution is depends on what you are trying to achieve. I'm curious if the author pursued learning Haskell and what he thinks of it now. Side effects are inevitable in any non-trivial application that interacts with the real world. They may only happen outside the runtime, but Haskell's design makes allowances for the perfection of its type system when it comes to interacting with other systems. Ultimately, the extent and impact of side effects have everything to do with the design of the program, and your compiler won't save a poor design. The true test of the design is years of real use and evolution and maintenance, and so I'd love to hear from people maintaining a huge years-old Haskell codebase how it compares to other languages.