Pandoc? I've never looked into the code (because haskell might be even harder to read than to write), but it's the obvious example of something super useful that was written in Haskell...
Re:Haskell People
by matt_kantor on Saturday September 30, 2017 @05:58PM
(#15375195)
Here are a few examples:
- http://store.steampowered.com/app/458200/Rumpus/
- https://postgrest.com/en/v4.3/
- https://git-annex.branchable.com/
Some lists with more:
- https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry
- https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_practice
Also, a bunch of programming languages are implemented in Haskell.
Also, https://chordify.net/ is implemented using Haskell. I've used that a couple of times. Very useful (if you play music).
Of course Haskell programs do things...lots of things. Are you sure you're not being condescending to people who want their programs that do things to have a solid mathematical foundation as well?
Where do you get that from?
There are lots of practical Haskell projects that "do things": From web frameworks over window managers to cryptocurrencies, and also many commercial projects that are all but mundane and where nobody cares about category theory.
You can also check out https://haskell-lang.org/libraries for some pretty practical documentation on libraries that Haskell programmers use to build programs that "do things".
Re:Haskell People
by quickthrower2 on Sunday October 01, 2017 @05:48AM
(#15377076)
Haskell doesn't force types to be nullable. Nulls are the "billion-dollar" mistake - by introducing bugs in programs.
That's just one example.
Even the most reasonable of "Haskell people," the OP included, seem to have this built in condescension for programs that actually do things. Still waiting for the Haskell community to produce something non-mundane to justify all that. If there was just one example of something that clearly demonstrated the unique value of Haskell to non-category-theory-enthusiasts.