This is the sort of comment on hacker news I absolutely love: I know one of us is sitting in a place of ignorant hubris, and I doubt its me.
The problems I refer to are, as I stated in the post, UX problems, and they arise ultimately from Rust's guarantees generics will be monomorphized, that allocations will be explicit, that arguments are passed by value, and so on. None of this applies to Haskell. We don't need to "improve on" Haskell (though I think our coherence and instance resolution rules are superior), we have different design constrants resulting in different problems.
The problems I refer to are, as I stated in the post, UX problems, and they arise ultimately from Rust's guarantees generics will be monomorphized, that allocations will be explicit, that arguments are passed by value, and so on. None of this applies to Haskell. We don't need to "improve on" Haskell (though I think our coherence and instance resolution rules are superior), we have different design constrants resulting in different problems.