"Could you give an example of something that is simple to express in Haskell, but harder and error prone to express in Go/Rust/[other imperative languages]? Hon

"Could you give an example of something that is simple to express in Haskell, but harder and error prone to express in Go/Rust/[other imperative languages]? Honestly curious!" This is hugely subjective but if I'm writing large data transformation pipelines for example, the type system and the compositionsal power of a language like Haskell, or pure FP scala, makes such a task an absolute breeze. It all just slots together like Lego. You have a high degree of confidence that the thing will work, and you can use local reasoning to understand the parts and, by extension the whole program, since the laws of composition and the lazy eval model make this trivial in comparison to imperative code. The way code can compose, the runtime and the resulting local reasoning, can honestly feel like a super power sometimes. Beware of thinking programs written in other languages are simpler to reason about, they might not be. There's more than the "simplicity" of the code to worry about in software. Is it better than Rust? I can't answer that sort of question, but I can tell you that full-throttled pure FP can be a pretty damn amazing tool when you need it. Rust seems to be a fascinating language for doing, say, systems programming, with some FP-like idioms built in. Amazing! Comparing languages though is tricky, it's always about tradeoffs, context and so on. I don't believe in a hierarchy of languages.