As long as the "actually..." only needs a small change to a simple regex (as in your example), perl probably wins the "actually..." game as well until you pull in enough libraries that the Haskell looks a lot like the perl. It's when the regex starts getting overcomplicated and the Haskell breaks out parser combinators that Haskell probably moves into the lead.
As you say, though, the margin perl maintains is small.
I think marcosdumay's claim is that Perl is less editable than Haskell. That's arguably true, though I'm not sure that editing a simple regexp in a simple script actually shows the issue.
Yeah, I agree with the broader claim. IMO well-structured Haskell will tend to be easier to maintain then well-structured Perl, and poorly structured Haskell will tend to be easier to get well structured than poorly structured Perl.
I just thought the express claim being made significantly oversold it. Whichever approach you take with the Haskell in the example under discussion, modifying the Haskell is not easier than adding a handful of characters to a simple regex.
As long as the "actually..." only needs a small change to a simple regex (as in your example), perl probably wins the "actually..." game as well until you pull in enough libraries that the Haskell looks a lot like the perl. It's when the regex starts getting overcomplicated and the Haskell breaks out parser combinators that Haskell probably moves into the lead.
As you say, though, the margin perl maintains is small.