[massysett]

Typed lisp? Unlike Lisp, Haskell has enormously complex syntax, so generating code in it is a huge hassle.

Template Haskell is something to use only when absolutely necessary, while Lispers write macros without a second thought.

I considered your method of writing my own tooling, but have had a vague feeling that Lisp works better for this frame of mind.

[spopejoy]

Haskell has almost no syntax, even `$` is a userland function. Are you arguing against the feature of allowing ad-hoc infix operators in userland?

[massysett]

"almost no syntax" is, I suppose, a matter of opinion. I wouldn't consider these sections from the Haskell 2010 Report to have "almost no syntax."

https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch3....

https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch4....

https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch5....

Dealing with this in Template Haskell is unwieldy at best.