zlacker

>>lukast+(OP)
When writing some IO bound application, async Rust is great. Less great for libraries that want to support both async and sync without having to make an async runtime a dependency if you just want the sync interface. Mutually exclusive features are taboo unfortunately. One thing I really love about Haskell is you can make any function run in a green thread by simply composing it with the 'async' function. There's nothing special about it. This works much better than say Go, because Haskell is immutable.

>>xedrac+zh
I'm not clear what your last sentence has to do with anything else? What does immutability have to do with Async/sync conversions?

>>XorNot+ri
you can fearlessly run code on another thread if you're not worried it's going to cause a data race or mutate anything

>>throwa+4m
This is very much not free though. Predicting memory usage in Haskell programs is notoriously tricky (and all the memory copies aren't free either).

>>XorNot+Tm
It's also the case with OCaml, Elixir, clojure, etc. Non lazy languages can also have a rich collection of immutable data structures and have more predictable memory usage than Haskell. On the other hand, Go doesn't have a culture or features that encourage immutability.