If Haskell's type system paths the way for the programmer to implement, innovate, and create, then there is no reason for change.
The same for Clojure, or any other.
I merely answered a question on Haskell's capabilities with a personal anecdote. Haskell has been hard for the teams I worked with, replacing it with Clojure enabled others to reach their potential.
But, as for my personal belief on whether static or dynamic typing is better? Different projects have different requirements, as do the hands that craft them.
If Haskell's type system paths the way for the programmer to implement, innovate, and create, then there is no reason for change.
The same for Clojure, or any other.
I merely answered a question on Haskell's capabilities with a personal anecdote. Haskell has been hard for the teams I worked with, replacing it with Clojure enabled others to reach their potential.
But, as for my personal belief on whether static or dynamic typing is better? Different projects have different requirements, as do the hands that craft them.