Thanks. I think I had read that before (probably an earlier version). Rather than it being aimed at a Haskell audience, the Intro seems to be aimed at a Javascript audience. That’s not me, which is why I was looking for some other docos. (Can I suggest that if that page is aimed at somebody looking for “differences from Haskell” you restructure the material.)
As the evaluation strategy matches JavaScript, interoperability with existing code is trivial - a function exported from a PureScript module behaves exactly like any “normal” JavaScript function, and correspondingly, calling JavaScript via the FFI is simple too.
… overly complicated JavaScript output.
I don’t have any Javascript code/interoperability is no requirement. I have no idea what is “normal” or “overly complicated” vs abnormal Javascript/I don’t care. Indeed I want the Javascript layer to be invisible [**]. (Just as the C layer is with GHC.) So this couple of paragraphs scares me that I’m going to need to know Javascript. It actively put me off purescript.
… introducing laziness on top of JavaScript comes with an unavoidable overhead.
I like laziness. (I spent decades programming in procedural languages, where I had to continually think about order of evaluation. It sucks.) If I can’t approach purescript with a declarative mindset, it’s not for me.
I think for a doco to be persuasive to switch from Haskell, I need assurance my functional-style thinking won’t be disrupted. GHC has too many bells and whistles: what might appeal about purescript is that it keeps things simple. So going on about purescript having as many bells and whistles again puts me off. I’m not a great fan of VTA/it seems like more finnickety syntax for something I can do already. (Or at least I could do if only GHC would support Function Result Signatures like it did a decade ago. Does purescript have that? Yes I know they’re being reintroduced into GHC, but that’s with significantly less functionality than a decade ago.)
[**] So the later message about compiler pipeline is just blah blah I don’t want to be bothered with.