This is exactly right. I use lenses all the time, but I have absolutely no idea how they're actually implemented, nor do I need to know. This is abstraction. I

This is exactly right. I use lenses all the time, but I have absolutely no idea how they're actually implemented, nor do I need to know. This is abstraction. If there's one thing Haskell does well it's abstraction. EDIT: It's really bizarre. We see these same responses to all the Haskell-or-Idris-or-whatever threads -- I wonder if there's some imposter syndrome going where "I can't immediately read/write Haskell" somehow morphs into "Haskell is useless". IME it's really rare for people who actually program in Haskell to have serious issues with the language. Yes there are issues from a smaller ecosystem, package management was bad (Stack fixed that), etc. etc. but there are very few fundamental problems with the language. Something so small as just Pattern Matching is a huge increase in productivity. Thankfully, quite a few languages have adopted pattern matching these days (Scala, Rust, TS, maybe even C++23?). (The really big payoff comes from granular effects, but I'm sure the rest of the world will realize in about 20-30 years' time. The Erlang people already have, albeit in a different way.)