<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>LukeHoersten</author><text>Every time I make an investment in learning and using a new language, core language developers leaving is one thing I worry about. The reason I&apos;ve stuck with Haskell for almost 6 years is because the more involved and familiar I get with the community, the more I confident I am in the abundance of very clever people ;-P. I have no doubt the Haskell community will be able to fill the (massive) gap left by Simon.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>A new era begins for Haskell</title><url>http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2012-December/105041.html</url><text></text></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>andrewcooke</author><text>[disclaimer  haven&apos;t used haskell for a decade, so this is pure speculation and not intended as any kind of informed criticism.]&lt;p&gt;is it possible that now would be a good time (just because it is a time when things seem to be changing) to simplify / clean up haskell?  what i am wondering / asking is whether more recent additions to the language (type system) are generalisations of earlier features.  in which case, maybe the earlier features could be dropped?&lt;p&gt;is anything like that possible or reasonable?  it&apos;s a fairly old language, which has evolved a lot, and it stuck me it might be a question worth asking... (something like python 3 i guess, but a bit more meaty)</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>A new era begins for Haskell</title><url>http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2012-December/105041.html</url><text></text></story>