>You are confusing OOP with subtyping. No, I am not. OOP can certainly exist without subtyping, but scala has subtyping for objects. Haskell does not have su

>You are confusing OOP with subtyping. No, I am not. OOP can certainly exist without subtyping, but scala has subtyping for objects. Haskell does not have subtyping. >I'm talking about things like the Dynamic type, existential types, HList None of those add subtyping. What would even be subtyped? >experiments like OOHaskell An abandoned experiment that is not a GHC extension. >Actually it matters the most You are free to think that, but nothing you said after that support that notion at all. We're talking about learning functional programming for the sake of learning functional programming. Haskell is better for that than scala is. Ecosystem is entirely irrelevant.