> To me, FP in modern functional languages provides abstractions that enable much more straightforward problem solving and understandable code with fearless refactoring.
Maybe, but they remove other abstractions. The lack of Haskell's popularity is a clear indication that the abstractions added are not as valuable to programmers as the abstractions removed.
> The lack of Haskell's popularity is a clear indication that the abstractions added are not as valuable to programmers as the abstractions removed.
No it's not. At most it's an indication that of the group programmers familiar with Hakell's abstractions that they aren't enough to try the language more.
For it to be a clear indication those programmers would actually have to learn to effectively use Haskell's abstractions and compare it to a version in their former language that doesn't utilize the abstractions.
Almost nearly no one does this however... I can recall one instance that comes close:
> For it to be a clear indication those programmers would actually have to learn to effectively use Haskell's abstractions and compare it to a version in their former language that doesn't utilize the abstractions.
No one tries everything, there's just no time to try all the possible alternatives.
Lack of popularity may not mean that the unpopular thing is bad, but it ain't a indication that further study would reveal it to be good.
In this particular case, Haskell isn't selling painkillers, it's selling vitamins. Few who have tried it go on to adopt it - it clearly isn't solving any immediate problem.
Maybe, but they remove other abstractions. The lack of Haskell's popularity is a clear indication that the abstractions added are not as valuable to programmers as the abstractions removed.