[zetalemur]

It's interesting to see that many long-standing members of the Haskell community take a look into (or even heavily use) Rust and add it to their repertoire. This is really a good sign for Rust (Haskell folks normally have high expectations from a PL).

It makes sense, as (currently) it's pretty much impossible to tackle some important domains (e.g. image de/encoding) in Haskell while in Rust we already have libraries for that. Also: Idiomatic Rust is already extremely fast, while in Haskell it is non-trivial to implement high-performing code.

Prime example: The sieve of Eratosthenes (and I think we can agree that this is a prime example). In Rust you can implement a trivial solution that performs extremely well. In Haskell you will probably reach for the ST monad and I think it's controversial if that's idiomatic or not (and maybe non-trivial to grasp - as far as I know ST is implemented via compiler magic).

[tome]

> it's pretty much impossible to tackle some important domains (e.g. image de/encoding) in Haskell

What do you mean? Image de/encoding is certainly possible in Haskell.

[zetalemur]

Yes, I may have worded that wrong, it's certainly possible. But is it reasonable? By that, I mean can it compete in performance with C/C++/Rust?

[tome]

Ah, not sure! Maybe you're right. But then it doesn't seem separate from your second point: "Also: Idiomatic Rust is already extremely fast, while in Haskell it is non-trivial to implement high-performing code.".

[zetalemur]

You are technically correct. The best kind of correct. :)