[seanhunter]

Haskell was always intended as a research language to promote innovation in computer science rather than as a general-purpose language trying to achieve mass adoption. In fact, "avoid success at all costs"[1] was the slogan they chose to reinforce the idea that the goal was not to achieve widespread usage. I'm not a serious haskell programmer, but I would heartily recommend messing around with it for a few weeks to anyone who wants to learn more about functional programming. It will expand your mind. One of my favourite ever hacking experiences was putting together a toy relational algebra in haskell over a weekend inspired by the string and list fusion papers (never actually managed to persuade ghc to actually optimise the fusion parts properly but that's another story).

Rust appears to have an entirely different goal, which is to take everything that has been learned over the last 40+ years of practical systems programming, and make a language that provides safety, speed and concurrency and works well for teams of programmers on large projects. [2] In that sense, it really is looking for wide adoption for the sorts of projects C and C++ have been used for during that time.

In its original version (Smalltalk and Ruby), this talk always struck me as a sort of fun polemic that probably didn't warrant too much serious thought, but here it's been stretched beyond belief, so I'm pretty surprised it's being posted here. Just as an example from the first paragraph, is there really anyone who seriously thinks rust is "Haskell without higher-kinded types"? That substitution has just been made because it vaguely fits the format of the original talk, but is just wildly off-base.

[1] https://haskell.foundation/whitepaper/ [2] I'm paraphrasing here, but check out https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch00-00-introduction.html for their explanation