4 ms·

I am really interested in Haskell, and I’ve written a good amount of it. I don’t blame someone for writing the software they want in any language they want. >

I am really interested in Haskell, and I’ve written a good amount of it. I don’t blame someone for writing the software they want in any language they want. > hah if you consider yourself "talented" or "experience" and can't contribute to a project you want to contribute to just because it's Haskell, you might have misevaluated yourself on those axes But the way some members of the Haskell community talks down to people is so off-putting. It is the main reason I stopped using it.

whateveracct 3y ago
I think the footnote you elided sums up my opinions here. I wasn't the one who brought up "talent" or "experience" - that was a direct response to the top-level comment. The footnote makes it clear neither are necessary. And that saying "even 'talented' and 'experienced'" folks couldn't from Haskell isn't a slight against the language choice but rather the aforementioned folks.
- FemmeAndroid 3y ago
  > saying "even 'talented' and 'experienced'" folks couldn't from Haskell isn't a slight against the language choice but rather the aforementioned folks. I don’t think that pointing out that esoteric language choice can make ”the barrier to entry quite“ high for participating in development is controversial. I try not to turn discussions about language choice into slights against people. People are different, and learn things differently. If you cannot empathize with casual contributors finding it more difficult, or not worth it, to contribute to unfamiliar languages in unfamiliar paradigms, I can’t help you. For what it’s worth, I agree with your response to: > I’m on board with functional programming and Haskell is very interesting, but I’ve still never understood the decision. A person’s fun and enjoyment at development has to be a key component to engaging in an activity. That’s why I stopped engaging with Haskell - the community’s attitude and conversational tone frequently involved talking down to people. More than many other language communities I’ve experienced. It’s not all Haskell devs; probably not a majority. But it’s not fun to be insulted when trying to add a sentence of context to a comment. It leads me to feel defensive in an unproductive way.

whateveracct 3y ago

I think the footnote you elided sums up my opinions here. I wasn't the one who brought up "talent" or "experience" - that was a direct response to the top-level comment. The footnote makes it clear neither are necessary. And that saying "even 'talented' and 'experienced'" folks couldn't from Haskell isn't a slight against the language choice but rather the aforementioned folks.

FemmeAndroid 3y ago
> saying "even 'talented' and 'experienced'" folks couldn't from Haskell isn't a slight against the language choice but rather the aforementioned folks. I don’t think that pointing out that esoteric language choice can make ”the barrier to entry quite“ high for participating in development is controversial. I try not to turn discussions about language choice into slights against people. People are different, and learn things differently. If you cannot empathize with casual contributors finding it more difficult, or not worth it, to contribute to unfamiliar languages in unfamiliar paradigms, I can’t help you. For what it’s worth, I agree with your response to: > I’m on board with functional programming and Haskell is very interesting, but I’ve still never understood the decision. A person’s fun and enjoyment at development has to be a key component to engaging in an activity. That’s why I stopped engaging with Haskell - the community’s attitude and conversational tone frequently involved talking down to people. More than many other language communities I’ve experienced. It’s not all Haskell devs; probably not a majority. But it’s not fun to be insulted when trying to add a sentence of context to a comment. It leads me to feel defensive in an unproductive way.