
Why is Haskell seldom used, despite being considered a wonderful language? - jsl
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Haskell-considered-such-a-nice-and-great-language-yet-is-not-being-used/answer/Justin-Leitgeb-1?srid=uEb5&amp;share=1
======
Yaa101
A lot of computational problems are not math but interfacing, I think Haskell
excels in the math related world and not in the interfacing one. This besides
the steep learning curve, for myself personally a programming language is also
a tool to help getting a mental picture of the problems to be solved. I loose
much of the mental picture when using a functional language, but also when
using a deep OO language. A functional language is too compact for me and a
deep OO language too fragmented. Must be my deficiency, I cannot speak for
others.

~~~
tome
> I think Haskell excels in the math related world and not in the interfacing
> one.

Absolutely to the contrary! Haskell is _superb_ at interfacing. Standard
Chartered have had a huge amount of success getting disparate and incompatible
enterprise systems to talk to each other by wrapping them in strongly typed
Haskell interfaces.

------
Nadya
Because the only people who can understand monads are people who already
understand monads. It doesn't help that people who think they understand
monads try to explain monads to people who don't understand monads.

FWIW my definition of monad is also wrong. I treat monads as the equivalent of
chaining. .do().this().then().that() and for most scenarios that way of
thinking _works_. But I don't pretend to understand monads.

Don't get me wrong - I really want to like Haskell. But I've yet to find a
monad explanation that didn't turn into "you understand monads when you
understand monads".

And understanding monads is a pretty important step for writing good Haskell
code.

------
paulpauper
it's too complicated when there are simpler alternatives

------
Learn2win
Elegant yet very abstract.

