Dependent Haskell
This read like a troll piece. Every line rubbed me in some wrong way until I couldn&#x27;t take it any more.<p>&gt; Haskell, at its core, is simple: it is just a polymorphic lambda calculus with lazy evaluation plus algebraic data types and type classes. This happens to be just the right combination of features to allow us to write clean, maintainable code that also runs fast.<p>This is an explainabrag which is also wrong: languages without these features can also have &quot;clean, maintainable code&quot; and nothing about this list implies &quot;runs fast.&quot;<p>&gt; Memory unsafe languages, such as C, lead to the worst sort of bugs and security vulnerabilities (buffer overflows and memory leaks).<p>Is a memory leak meant to be the &quot;worst sort of bug&quot; or a &quot;security vulnerability?&quot;<p>The implication is that memory-safe languages do not have memory leaks, which is completely false. Haskell is particularly prone to &quot;space leaks&quot; due to its laziness.<p>&gt; Memory safe languages form two groups: the ones that rely on a garbage collector, and Rust.<p>What a profoundly dismissive attitude. Why bring up Cyclone and not, say, Swift? Or is Swift meant to be included in &quot;garbage collected languages?&quot;<p>&gt; Dynamically typed (or, rather, unityped)<p>No these are not the same and this is an absurdly wrong conflation. Dart, Objective-C, TypeScript, and others are dynamically typed languages with static type checking. You can&#x27;t &quot;or rather&quot; this distinction away.<p>The author rushes past real-world facts to get to the architecture-astronaut rocket ship, solving type-theoretical problems and pretending it&#x27;s an engineering exercise. Blast off, I guess.