Languages like this are usually not meant for mainstream adoption.
It's more of a research language useful as a vehicle for exploring new concepts and approaches. Target audience is probably other programming language researchers.
> Programming languages researchers are like fashion designers and "research languages" like Haskell and Idris are like runway looks. Nobody expects people to go around snakes on their bodies. They're pushing the boundaries of art and science and showing what's possible.
And just like in fashion, the runway looks eventually change what people are wearing. Rust’s memory management would never exist in its current form if Cyclone hadn’t already shown it was possible.
Interesting analogy, but people are using Haskell, Prolog, etc. in production... if I were to stick to the comparison, I'd suggest that projects like Lighttable are more akin to the runway outfit.
Hm. Interesting, but I’d consider the languages with actual production use to be the “ready to wear” lineups. Where as things like this might be the haute couture runway looks.
That'd probably be your languages with large/cohesive libraries (I'm thinking ready to wear as in large retail).
Production-history without expansive libs is probably bespoke and half a complete library (eg rust/go, having half of what you want, and missing the other half) is boutique :-)
It's more of a research language useful as a vehicle for exploring new concepts and approaches. Target audience is probably other programming language researchers.