Haskell

Why should I learn it?

you shouldn't

To see how laziness, first class functions, abstract and parametric polymorphism fit together. No, monads are not central to the language. Yes, the IO libraries and the main function are implemented with monads, as to retain purity (your effects are made up of values made from expressions that get interpreted, sort of).

The thing's as state of the art as you'll find in languages on which there are books and tutorials online to read.

No, monads are not central to the language. Yes, the IO libraries and the main function are implemented with monads
wat

>>3
The thing's as state of the art as you'll find in languages on which there are books and tutorials online to read.
Do you determine state of the art primarily by obscurity?

sign, I guess it's just a hipster language after all.

>>4
Monad is just a typeclass (the Haskell equivalent of an interface). They are no more a central part of Haskell than any other datatype is. Because code performing I/O is implemented using monads, it can be used in the same way as any user-defined type.

(haha, "state" of the art)

Haskell: LISP without the obnoxiousness.

>>8
It's obvious you've never compared the legibility of Lisp and Haskell. Also, this made me laugh. Kudos.

>>5
No, you dolt. I would determine it by how much research is implemented in it, but I wouldn't know because I'm not a research it.

So I go by how novel and non-bullshitty it feels compared to 'mainstream' languages, even newer ones. For one, it doesn't have null dicking around everywhere, fucking up all your variables. And its data types, coupled with type inference, are the shit.

Shit, I'm asleep today. s/research it/researcher/

>>7
The documentation, not the language. You'd be an idiot to disagr- Oh wait.

>>10
For one, it doesn't have null dicking around everywhere, fucking up all your variables.
Instead we get runtime errors on undefined values and infinite memory leaks from lazy evaluation.

http://umenahaskal.com

>>10
Calm down, hipster.