On: Rust Sucks If I Fail to Write X

[adrianN]

Creating complex object graphs is also not trivial in Haskell, yet that language seems to do fine with real-world problems.

[jstimpfle → adrianN]

Is it doing fine? There's lots of "cool" stuff, but in my perception it's still a long shot to "fine with real-world problems".

What's a complex real-world program written in Haskell? It seems to be good for trees (compilers like GHC, although it is kind of slow). Is there a non-toy graphics or graph-ical application that is both performant and written in Haskell?

Not denying that it's possible to write C-style in it, of course... only it's not fun.

[pka → jstimpfle]

At my previous company we used Haskell for a very complex, edge-case ridden, algorithm heavy path finding and pricing backend.

For other uses, [0].

[0] https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry

[jstimpfle → pka]

Of course it would be nice to have examples that we can actually look at. Also that webpage is known to mostly not point to easy to find information.

[sjolsen → adrianN]

Haskell is also garbage-collected, and lazily evaluated to boot. It's not really an apples-to-apples comparison.

[adrianN → sjolsen]

Of course not. Haskell is a purely functional language and Rust is an imperative systems language. It can hardly be more Apples to Oranges.