[Haskell-cafe] Why are OCaml and Haskell being used at these companies?

[Henning Thielemann]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 jerzy.karczmarczuk at info.unicaen.fr wrote:

> Henning Thielemann writes:
>
> > ?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
> > programming.
>
> Is this a religious statement, quite popular in our Church of Functionalism,
> or you mean something concrete by that, and if yes, then what?

I meant that these languages, which are the main products of Wolfram and
MathWorks, respectively, are untyped or at least dynamically typed, and
thus are certainly not the appropriate tools for reliable development and
maintenance.  However, I see that Jon Harrop claimed statical type safety
only for OCaml and Haskell, and functional design and high productivity
for Mathematica and MatLab et.al.