You two are talking about two different things: - The parent is talking about the ecosystem, how menial tasks have tooling in "less interesting" languages - You are talking about the language itself
I would venture to guess that the parent would agree with you, if talking about the language in a vacuum.
An interesting competition would be to develop a complex product, without external dependencies.
My sad guess is that languages that are filled with escape hatches, like Java, Javascript, or python, would defeat more strict languages.
It's a sad guess, because I actually do prefer the Haskell way.
I think it's true, for example catch [1] requires IO. Do you mean with unsafePerformIO, or something else?
1: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.16.0.0/docs/Contr...
Nothing you point out gets even close, in my mind, to stuff like null pointers or untyped code. So I wonder what languages you have in mind that require less patience.
> you need IO for that. Which the language makes intentionally hard to use
Well, that is simply not true.