Functional programming beyond Haskell

We have all learned functional programming in Haskell, but there are more functional languages like Lisp, Scheme, ML, and Clean.

Why should we even bother to look further than Haskell?

- You want your programs to run faster.
- Monads drive you mad (what are they anyway? warm fuzzy things?).
- You need objects.
- You sometimes need a more powerful module system.

http://www.cs.uu.nl/wiki/pub/Stc/BeyondFunctionalProgrammingInHaskell:AnIntroductionToOCaml/ocaml.pdf

>>73
Lazy by default means Haskell doesn't do any extraneous work which implies its work is as efficient as possible.
Purity means safety as you don't have to reason about the external environment outside of the function. In fact, it is possible to mathematically prove the pure code will be correct for what it does. This is not possible for impure code
Whenever we use unsafePerformIO, we know where is a source of impurity which gives us hints to focus our effort whenever we encounter bugs in our program. We will use it when it's needed, and we don't need it everywhere.
That's just your opinion man.
That's just your opinion man.
That's just your opinion man.
That's just your opinion man.

>>75
No, they aren't. They use more memory but save a lot of time (less evaluations because some stuff is memoized while some stuff is never even evaluated).
Besides, no language can be purely strict or purely non-strict, it's just a question of choosing the default, and lazy evaluation is definitely not the worst default.