3 ms·

Haskell is painful for "real" programming because people have been doing "real" programming in C-like languages for decades, whereas the state of the art for a

Haskell is painful for "real" programming because people have been doing "real" programming in C-like languages for decades, whereas the state of the art for a lazily-evaluated, extremely statically-typed functional language influenced by category theory is still a bit immature. Haskell is a great language, but I understand hesitancy on taking it into production. Clojure and Scala are a joy to work with. Scala's problem is Java-culture hangover but the language itself is excellent (and may be what you're looking for in "a more powerful OCaml", although I'm not sure I'd describe it quite that way).

codewright 14y ago
>and may be what you're looking for in "a more powerful OCaml" Scala is neat, but the time I couldn't get sbt to run because it kept running out of memory, after having had no trouble with it for months, I decided it was time to rm -rf my scala install. I have a lot more background with Clojure (Lisps, really) anyway. I'd enjoy something with a more informative/helpful type system but Scala and Haskell are too broken, irritating, and unproductive for me. For people like KirinDave who've crested that mountain with Haskell, more power to them. I have to ship product ASAP and don't have time to wrangle with parser combinators just to read some XML though.