3 ms·
Haskell has a veeery steep learning curve. Most of the learners give up when starting to deal seriously with the type system. It happened to me: I've started to
by huqedato 4y ago
Haskell has a veeery steep learning curve. Most of the learners give up when starting to deal seriously with the type system. It happened to me: I've started to learn Haskell 3 times in the last 6 years. The first two times I gave up after a while. Now I feel I progressed consistently: I am dealing pretty well with notions such as type classes, functors, applicatives, monads, traversables, foldables etc. There are no similar notions in any other language I know about.
It's a pure language, too pure, there are no variable, no state etc.;
It is difficult to motivate people (outside academia) to learn it and use it for something productive.
Moreover, there are other FP languages that are more attractive and fairly easy to learn: Elixir, Closure, Elm. They are not so "pure"...
- fn-mote 4y ago> It is difficult to motivate people (outside academia) to learn it and use it for something productive. The main reason I suggest people learn Haskell: "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing." – Alan Perlis Just kidding, I have bills to pay, too. But my standard for whether it's worth learning another langage is quite a bit higher now. I definitely felt that learning Haskell improved my non-Haskell programming by making me more conscious (and cautious) of the impacts of using state. And more aware in retrospect when that has been the cause of wasted days debugging.
- kaba0 4y agoI don’t know, even very basic web development will require using plenty of these concepts, just in an ad-hoc, non-named way. I feel learning them through Haskell in a way where they have a name and a concrete concept, have proper types and thus compile time errors is so much more easier.