I don't really know how most of these relate to Haskell specifically. For example, you bring up safety and the exception model used in Java, but Haskell puts an even higher priority on safety/correctness than Java does. IDE support may be weaker, but IDEs tend to solve problems very specific to the languages they target, namely Java in this case. Refactoring is seen as much less of a problem, for example, since the lack of side effects lets you move any function to wherever you want in your code without breaking anything and the type system/compiler guide you through the entire process if you mess something up. And besides, pretty much every popular editor or IDE has a Haskell plugin that is easily as good as most of the Java tooling out there.
These are the kinds of questions I'd be concerned with:
Can I easily develop Haskell from any platform (Windows, Mac, Linux) and are good IDEs available on all of them? My team is diverse and I don't want to tell my engineers what platform they have to use for development. Can I meaningfully develop my server software on those platforms and deploy it to another OS (Linux)?
I agree that Haskell's type system will catch problems made in refactoring, but it's about avoiding the effort. If I wish to rename a method or a class, I don't want to spend time updating the text manually everywhere that is relevant and working through compiler errors - I just want to say "rename class", "rename method". In large code bases this prohibits people from improving the code over time and doing maintenance work.
Are there Haskell IDEs of equivalent quality to Eclipse and IntelliJ? My software development is a lot slower if I need to remember the standard library precisely and type its methods and classes, rather than typing TPE and allowing the IDE to auto-complete it to ThreadPoolExecutor; and it's a lot slower if I can't highlight a method and quickly invoke the IDE command for "show me all methods that call this method", or "show me the implementation of this class / method". I've personally found that this kind of code authoring and navigation assistance has a dominant impact on practical development speed.
When I've written a unit test, can I easily select the test in my IDE and run that single test with a keystroke, attaching a debugger if needed? (Maybe Haskell needs fewer unit tests, but for business software I doubt it.) That same test suite will be run by my build system at build time to make sure everything passes.
How would I accomplish in Haskell the equivalent of what Metrics helps you solve in Java? https://dropwizard.github.io/metrics/3.1.0/ Or Log4j and Slf4j? Managing log messages from large applications is important, since log messages are the primary after-the-fact record of what processing took place. They're often all you have to go on, aside from any metrics you've produced. (I would not buy the idea that Haskell code is so defect-free that these kinds of tools are unnecessary. In any case, Metrics is about performance metrics and business-relevant metrics.)
Are there profiling tools comparable to JProfiler? Can I easily get stack traces and heap dumps at runtime? In Java there are great interactive tools to explore these, to inspect every object and its properties and GC state. If the application crashes (not the runtime), is good troubleshooting information available to figure out what went wrong? It's more difficult, though still possible, to attach debuggers to production code and step through, so log messages are a poor man's after-the-fact trace. That said, I can still attach a debugger to a JVM remotely over the network and inspect the threads, heap, etc., and step through code execution. Is it easy to debug (attach a debugger to) a Haskell program as-is over the network in production?
How would I write a distributed map/reduce job with Haskell and execute it across a large fleet, like I would with Java using Hadoop, Spark? Are there distributed actor frameworks with the quality of Akka, or messaging systems like Kafka? Are there good RPC libraries for Haskell to interact with other applications written in Apache Avro, Google Protocol Buffers, Cap'n Proto, and so on? The tools I mention are solid, and very widely deployed - they're not obscure.
There are a lot of practical large-scale problems that I can solve easily in Java, ones where many other programmers would be familiar with the solution I'd use. If there are good ways to solve these problems then I'd love to learn more. I've always been a fan of the Haskell language and its concepts, as well as F# and Scala. However, despite my wish to use them, I've run into a lot of practical challenges. These extra-linguistic factors involved in running software in production dominate the linguistic ones.
Those are absolutely the correct kind of questions to be asking. I think Haskell has very good answers to most of them, sometimes better than the answer for Java. I actually use Scala pretty much full time these days myself, but I think the original post was overstating the case for the JVM. I agree with the value of a single runtime, good instrumentation, and avoiding non-memorysafe or non-crossplatform code, but the JVM is absolutely not required to accomplish those things.
