Re:Haskell for a New Decade [pdf]
by namelosw on Wednesday June 24, 2020 @05:44AM
(#23626018)
> Instead of Haskell we should be thinking of programming language research and how to get the best ideas into our mainstream languages.
I believe Scala is already such a language.
> There are even features not in Haskell proper like Liquid Haskell that would be interesting to have in C# or Typescript.
There are many advanced type system feature are very hard or mathematically impossible to implement in main stream languages. The reason Haskell can maintain its novelty is due to purist and minimalist approach on many aspect of the language.
For example, Hindley-Milner languages cannot add sub-typing. But it can easily infer the type of parameters and the return type of the recursive function, while Scala cannot despite the fact it's very advanced.
> C# -> Ruby is 10 hours to be productive, 100 hours to be reasonable. C# -> Haskell is ten times that.
> would be interesting to have in C# or TypeScript
While I tend to agree, there are also many teams are also burnt by these languages because multiple paradigm actually makes things even harder. It's easy to be productive, but as people climbing the tower of advanced type, the code diverse, the idioms people speak diverse, too. It's not as easy as we thought to be reasonable. There are also many people in Scala community eventually found out it's better to just use the functional part only rather than mix everything.
I believe Scala is already such a language.
> There are even features not in Haskell proper like Liquid Haskell that would be interesting to have in C# or Typescript.
There are many advanced type system feature are very hard or mathematically impossible to implement in main stream languages. The reason Haskell can maintain its novelty is due to purist and minimalist approach on many aspect of the language.
For example, Hindley-Milner languages cannot add sub-typing. But it can easily infer the type of parameters and the return type of the recursive function, while Scala cannot despite the fact it's very advanced.
> C# -> Ruby is 10 hours to be productive, 100 hours to be reasonable. C# -> Haskell is ten times that. > would be interesting to have in C# or TypeScript
While I tend to agree, there are also many teams are also burnt by these languages because multiple paradigm actually makes things even harder. It's easy to be productive, but as people climbing the tower of advanced type, the code diverse, the idioms people speak diverse, too. It's not as easy as we thought to be reasonable. There are also many people in Scala community eventually found out it's better to just use the functional part only rather than mix everything.