> 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 (the latter is important when doing performance analysis on your code). This constrained framework also takes its toll on software engineering, then.
I disagree. People don't automatically think in certain terms unless they're taught to.
I personally never took CS in University, and I'm completely self taught as far as programming goes. Haskell feels quite natural, so does Lisp. Java and C feel foreign.
Maybe if someone's had imperative languages drilled into their head for 4+ years Haskell will feel foreign, and maybe that's why mathematicians, financial people and others who don't quite fit the typical programmer paradigm are into Haskell (or so I hear - I always hear about Haskell and OCaml being for 'academic' types).
To me, Haskell has nice syntax, makes sense, is fast, and feels like a dynamic language for the most part with its type inference and great interpreter...
I disagree. People don't automatically think in certain terms unless they're taught to.
I personally never took CS in University, and I'm completely self taught as far as programming goes. Haskell feels quite natural, so does Lisp. Java and C feel foreign.
Maybe if someone's had imperative languages drilled into their head for 4+ years Haskell will feel foreign, and maybe that's why mathematicians, financial people and others who don't quite fit the typical programmer paradigm are into Haskell (or so I hear - I always hear about Haskell and OCaml being for 'academic' types).
To me, Haskell has nice syntax, makes sense, is fast, and feels like a dynamic language for the most part with its type inference and great interpreter...