HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

Haskell is actually used by companies to solve practical problems, a non trivial example being Facebook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlTO510zO78

Not too bad for an abstract experimentation.

> All computers ask is for semantic precision and you don't need a static type verification to get precision. So clearly static type verification is unnecessary for producing programs that work

That's a bit contrived. No matter which language you write in, at some step a type check will happen. For dynamic types its at runtime and for static types its at compile time.

> And clearly statically-typed everywhere PLs are asking the programmer to do extra work. That's prima facie true. So the burden is really on the MLer/Haskeller to prove that that extra work is giving overall delivery throughput to the programming team. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I'm waiting for the clearly thought out justification. Haven't heard it yet.

Here are just a few of the real world accounts of using Haskell in production, you can check out:

- The Joy and Agony of Haskell in Production: http://www.stephendiehl.com/posts/production.html

- Haskell is Not For Production and Other Tales: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlTO510zO78

- Production Haskell - Reid Draper: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZQLkkDXy68

If these didn't convince you, there are tons of Haskellers that will attest that the type system in the long run has quite substantial benefits.

Probably this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlTO510zO78

⬐ cies

The announcement of the talk: https://linux.conf.au/schedule/30363/view_talk