[freyrs3]

> ... with the way it manages side effects is that it does so through lazy evaluation

Modern Haskell manages effects through it's type system, not through lazy evaluation.

> They require programmers to think and program solely within Haskell's lambda calculus and lazy evaluation framework, which is neither the way people think nor the way computers do

Haskell doesn't require you to think in the lambda calculus any more than C requires you to think in register allocations, it's a low level implementation detail that effectively gets abstracted away. Nor are you required to think solely in terms of pure code, Haskell 2010 has a whole variety of ST Monad solutions where you can effectively do whatever pointer manipulations you want and still remain pure with respect to the rest of your program. I take serious issue with the description of Haskell being "constrained", it has reached a compromise of safety and power that I have yet to see in any other language.