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

>>109
It's holes when you hit Obj.magic or use FFI. That really doesn't have anything to do with any "holes" you might imagine in comparisons or oracles.

>>110
Still no holes. Yaron Minsky is worried about its performance, and confusion stemming from failing to understand comparisons. That seems unlikely because we're all used to writing Module.operation foo in OCaml. We would more likely mistake the operands for basic types than anything else.

But he thinks it's a good idea to include a hack based on comparison behaviour regarding objects in the standard library, tipping his hand that performance is his main concern (Jane Street is HFT or whatever.)