3 ms·
This is a strange distinction to make when evaluating a programming language. I can understand an evaluation that begins like "I need a language that is useful
by maxhallinan 9y ago
This is a strange distinction to make when evaluating a programming language. I can understand an evaluation that begins like "I need a language that is useful for solving x problem" or even "problem of x type". But if you're trying to evaluate Haskell in general terms, a list of the Haskell apps targeted at a non-technical audience is a dubious heuristic.
- workthrowaway27 9y agoI disagree. C++ is hard to use too (for different reasons), but tons of non-programming related applications are written in it. Most problems aren't programming related, so it makes sense to measure a PL by its effectiveness in non-programming related applications.
- setr 9y agoI'm pretty sure what OP is considering is that Haskell is well known for its usage in theory heavy works (where the domain is mostly well-specified, and possibly even beautifully so), but not well known for applications where you have to make unspecified, awkward, temporary and sometimes nonsensical updates (anything that so much as breathes near a layman). And given haskell's background as a research language, it makes sense for it to be biased towards the former. So the question is, by how much?