Edit: I forgot about consultancies like Well-Typed and Tweag
Another trend (that I don't particularly like) is all the blockchain startups using Haskell.
All of the pretension that comes with knowing one of the functional languages that has a community that pretends to know math, and they end up working retail. Ow.
Joking diss aside, though, I definitely feel for people who love languages with limited reach.
(Also, I think GitHub hired a few people explicitly for Haskell, which is worth mentioning because Microsoft is vaguely more reputable than most of the companies listed in this thread.)
the act of trying to appear or sound more important or clever than you are
Some irony in your comment. I meant exactly what was said.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
(Or really, just combine "cryptocurrency" or "cryptocurrencies" with any negative word and throw it into search and you'll see the point.)
All cryptocurrency has a serious reputation problem right now, and it's probably not going to go away for the considerable future.
It doesn't mean that the company has a product.
Sorry but doesn't this statement fit better to the definition of "borderline" something?
I'm not that pro-haskell but I also see how all languages in the last decade shifted toward fp idioms clearly. I mean redux is a fold.
And although a lot of practically useful stuff has come out of Haskell-land (property based testing, for example), it's not even obvious to me that Haskell has been a huge part of the shift to more FP-y idioms (compared, to say, scheme or SML). Your own example, fold, has been around decades before Haskell.
I agree that SML isn't even on the map, in terms of practical programming language choices (one of the most hilariously titled CS books of all time must _ML for the working programmer_ where the final "real project" chapters consist of writing such working programer perennials as a lambda calculus interpreter and a theorem prover). And I believe that even scheme is less suited to write almost any type of practical software than Haskell. But that's precisely my point: a language having a positive influence on the state of applied programming does not mean that it is actually a good choice for solving practical problems with. And vice versa.
btw I love sml. I'm just being realist about it's mainstream existence.
Lastly, it's as if you consider haskell as proof of concept and nothing more. I don't see any real hurdles why haskell is less practical than typescript (except the fact that TS relies on the years of js project they can compile and interop with)
By the way, I'm particularly interested because I am writing about Haskell myths. I have a very rough draft at http://h2.jaguarpaw.co.uk/posts/haskell-myths/
I understand your question though, it's highly possible that the devs picked haskell for their own interest. But so far it's been a few years and the haskell "module" is dealing with the core of their business.
Except that's exactly what languages that provide a business value do (like the ones I mentioned). Maybe not always in all layers, but they tend to fill a big, wide niche at a company very quickly.