upvote
Part of the issue is probably that Haskell build performance is perfectly fine for local development, even on rather large systems.

But in commercial production environments, CI pipelines tend to want to build everything from scratch every time, and that slows everything down. Rust has the same issue. Both languages, by default, compile all their dependencies from source, rather than obtaining precompiled artifacts from a repo the way some languages (like Java) do. And their compilers are slower than e.g. Go's. As the article mentions, various kinds of caching can help with that, but that's extra stuff you have to manage and deal with.

I'm not sure this is a bad thing, though. Haskell co-creator Simon Peyton-Jones coined the unofficial Haskell motto, "avoid success at all costs". I tend to agree with that. It would be difficult for Haskell to maintain its conceptual edge if it were a mainstream commercial language.

reply
The thing I hate about rust is that compiling a small app immediately creates 100gb of junk, and that junk doesn't live in the responsible project's folder, and that junk doesn't get cleaned up by anything.
reply
You're exaggerating quite a lot. Biggest I've seen the cargo directory after 3 months of active Rust development was ~17GB.

You can also limit it with an env var. I have capped mine at 10GB.

reply
I’m at 227GB as I write this.
reply
Had no nuke the `target` folder a couple of weeks ago, +400 GB ...
reply
Many rust nightly versions + no clean / sweep / clean-all?
reply
Just the one version, but lots of test builds in quick succession.
reply
“Linux System Requirements: 3.2MB [+ 17GB the first day]”
reply