A follow up to this comment... Please, haskell people, read what other people are writing: > Sorry but this is just crazy. I always wonder if people writing bl

A follow up to this comment... Please, haskell people, read what other people are writing: > Sorry but this is just crazy. I always wonder if people writing blog posts like that have ever worked in a big company. You need to spend at least 2-3 hours a day doing code reviews and most of the rest you are writing code, which subsequently involves reading the code you wrote yourself and others have written. > Now we currently use Java here. I worked with other programming languages in companies too, for instance C and C++ which were a nightmare with no equal. Don't get me wrong, when I was in college I just loved creating crazy shit with template metaprogramming and preprocessor metaprogramming. Once you mature out of it, this is just the most craziest thing you could ever do. These impressions of Haskell are wrong Haskell is not crazy, it's actually insanely reasonable -- so reasonable in fact that it will not let you compile code that is crazy. This is the message getting lost in crazy type signatures (which admittedly often do cool/useful things if you undertsand them) and overly verbose/complex examples. > Hello, I am at Amazon. I spend a decent portion of my time working with an in-house Clojure library (not entirely dissimilar to Haskell) which handles some mission critical business logic my team owns. > It terrifies me. I hate it. I do not use/encourage use of Clojure any more, and this comparison scares me -- Haskell is not clojure, but it's getting lumped together and this really worries me because it should not be. Haskell helps you write clear code -- type signatures, pure functions, immutable values, typeclasses, algebraic data types are all tools to make your code clearer and more obviously correct. If this isn't getting across haskell is in trouble/has a big marketing problem.