Why does everyone consider the best language that currently

>>59140600
Not used in production.

Language is irrelevant to big businesses, they care about results. Haskell is a poor engineering language, it was built by and for academics.

>>59140600
It's made for and used by smartasses and other compsci PhDs.

>>59140600

Nobody does

it's the child of academia and people use it as a topic to write published articles about basically

>>59140600
It's just one of those things that don't match with humans in general. Same thing with any lisp, regardless of it lovely qualities. Probably good research ground though for techniques that C# and Java can steal.

>functional
>good

>>59144643
Yes, which is why OO languages are slowly adding more and more functional features.

The fucking stink of you idiots who have never used Haskell is alarming

>>59143502
Java steals from Common Lisp. C# pilfers from Delphi.

Both take implementation ideas from C++.
I can rewrite older CL program's I wrote years ago almost directly into Java as of today.

Some features are not available though. I can't extend null with methods for example.
Sad!

>>59140600
type String = [Char]
>inb4 just use bytestring
I can't because even getArgs uses String
otherwise it's a truly wonderful language

>>59140600
Because they love the OOP meme. Some businesses use it, but there are not enough hipsters in FP to make it the norm.

>>59140600
Because it makes simple things difficult.

>>59145958
how is that bad, all strings are char lists in modern languages

>>59140600
Because people spend 30 minutes trying to learn it, and then give up because it's not a Fisher-Price language like JS, Python or Ruby.

>>59146755
its not bad unless you need performance, but at that point you call out to rust

>>59140600
>best
LOL it's been around for what, 25+ years and it still hasn't gained traction.

>>59149223
neither has your mum, what's your point?

>>59143502
>>59145953
Lisp was seen in industry though... then winter came.

File: th_hasklel.jpg (79KB, 622x541px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 622x541px

>>59140921
>>59140927
>>59140983
/thread

>>59149254
Now that's just wrong!

>>59140600

Non strict semantics were a mistake.

Lack of proper parameterized modules too.

>>59140600
I'm bad with high level math. Should i try haskell anyway?

>>59140921
>not programming for fun

>>59140600
Rate my code

hailstones :: Int -> [Int]
hailstones n
  | n < 1     = error "n must be >= 1"
  | n == 1    = [1]
  | even(n)   = [n] ++ (hailstones (quot n  2))
  | otherwise = [n] ++ (hailstones (n * 3 + 1))
[\code]