> It's actually about what could kill Haskell, not what could kill Rust?

Here is the articles title: "What killed Haskell, could kill Rust, too"

So no, it's not about what could kill Haskell. In 2022, ~0.3% of all code pushed to github was Haskell. To put that number into perspective: vimscript was ~0.25%

Yes, I can read the title thanks. The article is about Haskell. The first sentence makes it clear it's speculative fiction presented as if from the year 2030. The article draws a hypothetical analogy between what could happen to Rust in 2030 and what is contemporaneously happening to Haskell.

Yes, I read the article, thanks.

Yes, it is a speculative fiction, with a good reason, because the analogies are pretty clear.

And to return to the topic at hand, despite that article pointing to some weakness in the Haskell community, Haskell is thriving, so "We're suggesting that people should just use Rust (or Haskell, or F#, or any other robust functional programming language) instead" seems like reasonable advice to me.

> Haskell is thriving

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38360177

So, according to what metric is Haskell "thriving"?

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that something that occupies 0.3% of an ecosystem can't be thriving? "Thriving" is not the same concept as "widely used" or "popular"!