Would you say these languages are impractical because of their stylistic choice to use operators?
I think people have a preconception that "Haskell is not practical" -- and then anything that they do not find appealing becomes a source of its impracticality. Despite the fact that the same traits are shared with vastly practical languages.
Yes, I do find their use of operators impractical. In particular the pointer syntax drives me up the wall. I never seem to get it right. As does the printf syntax, come to think of it. Why is integers refered to with "%d"? Can't come up with a reason. And dynamically allocating function pointers on the heap (calloc) requires completely batshit insane keyboard manoeuvres. It would have been a lot better if it was typechecked, which is why I would prefer Haskell.
I can vaguely sense somewhere in my memory that <<= and it's ilk are bit shift operators. How am I supposed to know that? Fuck it. It's bad library design.
I like Python. How do you append to aList? Answer: aList.append(anElement). Scala, on the other hand, seems to believe that ":+" is an acceptable append syntax. The compiler won't let me do stupid stuff with it, which is good, but I would prefer it if errors was caught by English-proficiency instead of rote knowledge/the compiler. I think that's a very powerful distinction.
You would prefer errors to be caught by a human needing to exercise their English-proficiency over errors being caught by the compiler? Seriously? That can't actually be what you mean.
I think people have a preconception that "Haskell is not practical" -- and then anything that they do not find appealing becomes a source of its impracticality. Despite the fact that the same traits are shared with vastly practical languages.