3 ms·

Would you say that you've engaged in good faith with the point the author was trying to make?

• jamil7 6y ago
  Eh, I kind of agree with the parent comment. The author didn't bring up any compelling points that couldn't be found in other modern languages (granted these likely borrowed from Haskell). As an outsider to Haskell I was hoping for some more concrete use cases for picking the language.
  • weego 6y ago
    Honestly there are no compelling arguments for picking Haskell over other languages in the same domain. Limited open-source to leverage, incredibly limited and costly hiring opportunities, not that great tooling and integrations. Any upside you can sell from a pure programming point of view (there are some very valid ones) pale in comparison to the negatives it brings to your overall business.
• coldtea 6y ago
  Absolutely
• FpUser 6y ago
  I've found article arguments incorrect - what they describe as Haskell's features and more are easily available in other languages as well. Strictly enforcing function style on the other hand looks to me as un-feature. From my long experience strictly enforcing any particular paradigm/style in programming is amounts to plugging round holes with the square pegs.
  • warcher 6y ago
    I'm a partisan, of course, but I always found ocaml to be the practical choice for ML-style functional languages. All the functional type-y goodness without being shackled to it, you can let yourself off the hook if you need to, you can just write a dang loop if that's what needs doing, compiles down to native, just a good practical mix. Other than Jane Street, nobody much uses it though, so that's that.