After working in a large Ruby code base for a while and seeing the pains of maintaining it I now see the pitfalls of NOT having strong typing, algebraic data types, abstract data types and purity (but not so much laziness).
There's good starting material but the intermediate to advanced level needs better resources. I recently found Type Classes which is a step in the right direction.
In addition, I recently came to the realization that if you just learn and use what's in here you'd still be able to design and build more maintainable and robust systems that what many of the mainstream languages have to offer. There's just one hitch to that and it's that Haskell libraries tend to use so much advance stuff and GHC language extensions that they force you to have to know more.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
After working in a large Ruby code base for a while and seeing the pains of maintaining it I now see the pitfalls of NOT having strong typing, algebraic data types, abstract data types and purity (but not so much laziness).
There's good starting material but the intermediate to advanced level needs better resources. I recently found Type Classes which is a step in the right direction.
In addition, I recently came to the realization that if you just learn and use what's in here you'd still be able to design and build more maintainable and robust systems that what many of the mainstream languages have to offer. There's just one hitch to that and it's that Haskell libraries tend to use so much advance stuff and GHC language extensions that they force you to have to know more.