# The future of Dependent Haskell

**URL:** <https://discourse.haskell.org/t/the-future-of-dependent-haskell/10614>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [October 25, 2024, 7:16am UTC](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/the-future-of-dependent-haskell/10614 "2024-10-25T07:16:04Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 47

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![atravers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/45deac/32.png) [@atravers](https://discourse.haskell.org/u/atravers)\
**Post date:** [October 27, 2024, 5:49am UTC](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/the-future-of-dependent-haskell/10614/47 "2024-10-27T05:49:39Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> I’d be very reluctant to slow the snail’s pace of DH progress by getting diverted on to making more noise, just to give the illusion of community engagement. You’re dreaming that “other Haskellers” would be anything more than a distraction.

- It’s **int-index** who will be publishing the DT task-breakdown, not me.

- Here’s a post from a Haskeller who would be interested in that breakdown:

- If enough of those subtasks can be done by others besides **int-index** and **sand-witch** , that ought to increase the speed of progress towards a full implementation of dependent types for Haskell (beyond the current _“snail’s pace”_).

* * *

> If you’re committed to Haskell (perhaps mandated by your employer) then suck it up.

That only makes sense for more experienced Haskellers like us - we should **not** expect that _“crawl over cut razor-wire and landmines”_ attitude of new Haskellers.

But since you mentioned employers:

> [@Hasura migrating to Rust?](http://discourse.haskell.org/t/hasura-migrating-to-rust/6620):
>
> Yesterday Hasura (a GraphQL server generator written in Haskell) announced their upcoming version 3 during their yearly conference HasuraCon 2023. One of the highlights in the announcement was they were in the process of migrating the server implementation over to Rust. I wonder if there are any insiders here who would like to share the reasoning and what they think it means for Haskell, the language and community.

…perhaps _they_ got tired of having to _“suck it up”_.

* * *

> I programmed in COBOL/SQL/RPG for decades. My opinion on them as languages was not invited.

Neither was this thread - it was a reaction to the hiding of this other post of mine to the original thread:

> [@The future of Dependent Haskell](http://discourse.haskell.org/t/the-future-of-dependent-haskell/10614/3):
>
> data Risk a b = Loss a | Gain b So to everyone who truly believes that “Dependent Haskell” won’t go the way of the [Fifth Generation Computer Systems](https://museum.ipsj.or.jp/en/computer/other/0002.html) project or the [BitC](https://web.archive.org/web/20160912053551/http://www.coyotos.org/pipermail/bitc-dev/2012-March/003300.html) programming language: What if you are wrong?

before it was moved here.

* * *

> [\*\*\*] I’m not using GHC 9 series at all. I’m applying the features/fixes, extensions I value to another Haskell.

…much like how MicroHs has various Haskell extensions as permanent features: _“you get what you get”._

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/the-future-of-dependent-haskell/10614)._