> Stack / cabal, haddock, htest can be comparable to Rust’s tooling. Disagree from me. I spent a year writing Haskell professionally, and from my own personal

> Stack / cabal, haddock, htest can be comparable to Rust’s tooling. Disagree from me. I spent a year writing Haskell professionally, and from my own personal experience Haskell's tooling was overly complicated and difficult to use. Maybe my impression is totally wrong or outdated, and it's surely not applicable to the whole community, so I'm sorry if this is a little out of touch now, but I sometimes got the sense that Haskell's community just doesn't care about the developer experience. They hold to this false dichotomy that if you make tools easy to use, then you can't have advanced features. Or simply, Cabal works just fine the way it is, why do we need Stack? Why would you need more than one GHC installation on a machine? Holy wars on the mailing lists re: Stack, Cabal, Haskell Platform. And if someone tells me to "just use Nix" one more time I will cry... Rust feels like a breath of fresh air. The community seriously cares about their developer experience both for newbies and experienced professionals, and it really feels like a lot of work has gone into making the tools and documentation accessible and useful.