| I have been using Haskell seriously for about two years now and humorously for a bit longer. For some reason I bought the old sales pitch some time ago. Now that I have a clue about the language I would like to rewrite the sales pitch for anyone considering a move. Here's what happens in the middle of a big Haskell project. 1) Take some existing code. 2) Refactor (Add a feature, change a record element, etc.) 3) Run ghc, then fix all the errors it reports. Repeat this
step as needed. 4) Done. What would be different in python? For one, no compile errors means very little. How many test cases would you need? How would you find all the places the code must change? Lesson: A tough, smart compiler can be the programmer's best friend. Meta-lesson: There is little need to discuss laziness, purity or static typing to "sell" Haskell. They are enablers of ghc. What you need is a big, complicated code base and an urgent need to make changes to it. You won't have that until you get your feet wet. Is Haskell perfect? No, but I'll save that for an OP that is overhyping the language. |