I always hear Haskell people focus on reuse in terms of mathematical abstractions, like a reusable way of composing three functions in a a pattern that's "Reall

I always hear Haskell people focus on reuse in terms of mathematical abstractions, like a reusable way of composing three functions in a a pattern that's "Really everywhere if you know where to look" or something, while abstraction as OOP people understand it takes a backseat. To me, that seems hard to interpret any other way than "To use Haskell to maximum benefit you have to be very smart and able to see deeply hidden patterns with ease". As an outsider, nothing about it seems like it was designed to take 1000 random new average graduates and put them on a project and get good results. Java looks nasty and ugly but its hard to argue with how well it seems to work for large desktop apps. JS works amazingly well just because every individual project is trivial, the whole ecosystem is based on frictionless npm reuse. Haskell looks like it has potential, and studies seem to show it reduces bugs, but I have no real way to evaluate it. I don't see thousands of people making million line apps with huge teams of mediocre developers. I can't really try it myself because... I'm not about to spend 2 years working on a personal megaproject, learning the details of 2 dozen libraries,etc, just to evaluate it. So... how am I supposed to know how well Haskell does in the contexts I'm actually interested in? I could learn it, and build some toy app... but that's not going to tell me how it scales to a 10+ year monolith that is primarily about manipulating state. Rust seems like the best choice for the low level stuff these days. I don't know what the true best for high level is, but Typescript and Python+MyPy rarely disappoint.