4 ms·
I have a similar experience and I agree. I think there is a solid, relatively practical language hiding under all the language extensions, but the never ending
by azurelake 5y ago
I have a similar experience and I agree. I think there is a solid, relatively practical language hiding under all the language extensions, but the never ending desire of the community to solve problems of abstraction vs. real user problems makes it a dead end in terms of time spent.
And funnily enough, the time I've spent really learning shell/awk/sed (pretty much the exact opposite of Haskell!) was one of the best investments of my career!
- ilovecaching 5y agoIt's funny, but also easy to unravel I think. Haskell sits diametrically across from the C lineage of languages that focus on practicality first and foremost. It's hard to beat practical value versus theoretical value. I also almost mentioned that I think language extensions are one of the things that hold it back the most from being more than a research project. But deciding what set of extensions are needed to make the language practical is probably a difficult problem for anyone to solve.
- kqr 5y agoI would object that C focuses on practicality. If you mean for the compiler writer, sure, C is very practical for someone who wants to make a compiler. But I'm afraid people might read your comment as saying C is practical for writing applications.
- azurelake 5y agoThe parent comment said "C lineage", not C.
- azurelake 5y agoYeah, and a real problem is how they "poison" the ecosystem. If the community was one that strongly encouraged libraries and frameworks to stick to Haskell2010, I might still consider using it.