An opinionated beginner’s guide to Haskell in mid-2019

This is mostly intended as a guide for people who are beginners to Haskell, or have experience in other similar languages and are looking to learn Haskell. Depending on where you are in your Haskell journey, parts of this guide might not make sense. That’s perfectly normal, relax.

(This is also not for you if you’re coming to Haskell because you’re interested in the connections with type theory or category theory. I’m the wrong person for that.)

As a quick litmus test, if you’ve written more than 10k lines of Haskell, this guide is probably not for you. Also, I do not have the time/energy to justify each and every statement. Please cut me some slack.

This is not a style guide. If you want one, you could use Kowainik’s style guide or Johan Tibbe’s style guide. I’m sure there are more, but these are good. Overall, I don’t think “style guides” are a big deal in Haskell land (compared to say something like PEP 8 in Python, or standard formatters like gofmt/elm-format).

This guide is, very loosely speaking, an extension of Alexis King’s excellent An opinionated guide to Haskell in 2018 (henceforth OGH18). As such, I will not try to repeat the points made there, unless I have a different opinion. I will point you to the relevant portions of that guide and expect that you will read them.

Enough chit chat and disclaimers. Let’s go.

Key principle

Make decisions based on popularity and simplicity.

Once you’re comfortable, feel free to go kamikaze with your library and language extension choices.

Also, feel free to retreat once you get too deep. There is no shame in enforcing fewer invariants using types if that means you can understand your code much better.


How do I learn Haskell?

Different people learn differently. Without knowing more about you, it is hard to make a blanket one-size-fits-all recommendation.

If you’re new to functional programming, the CIS 194 Spring 2013 course is widely considered as a great resource, particularly if you’re new to functional programming.

If you already have some familiarity with functional programming, it might be best to have a small project in mind and work towards it.

Haskell Programming from First Principles (a.k.a. haskellbook) is also often recommended for beginners. It doesn’t assume previous programming experience. I’ve found it useful to some extent, if somewhat slow/ponderous.

I found Real World Haskell to be more suited to my learning style. At this point, some parts of the book are a bit outdated (some libraries have been superseded by better alternatives), but most of the core is still solid.

There’s also Programming in Haskell. I can’t really comment on it as I haven’t read it, but I’ve heard good things about it. The good thing is that it has many exercises, and it is written by Graham Hutton, who has a lot of experience teaching Haskell.

Learn you a Haskell for great good! is somewhat fun/whimsical if you’re getting started, but I don’t find it very practical. However, it lacks exercises, which means that it isn’t well-suited as a primary learning resource. It also has some questionable choices of examples.

I highly recommend Oskar Wickstrom’s excellent Haskell at Work YouTube channel.

The key thing, in my opinion, is to practice. Whether it is through doing a project, or following a book and doing exercises, or something else, there’s no real substitute for actually writing Haskell code and facing the type errors head on.

Getting help

If you’re having difficulty understanding things, please ask! You getting stuck means that you’re less likely to stick around, and that makes me sad because I want more people to enjoy learning and using Haskell.

When asking (and specifically for recommendations), it is important that you tell the opposite person about your experience level, so they can adjust their recommendation(s) accordingly.

If you don’t have much experience asking programming-related questions online, read a how-to about it (e.g. this one is short and sweet), which will help others help you better.

There are several places to ask questions. The r/haskell subreddit has several links in the sidebar, which you may find useful. If you find general functional programming chat groups (e.g. on Slack or Discord), it is likely that someone there might be able to help you with Haskell-related questions. For example, you could try the FPChat Slack channel #haskell-beginners (invite).

Twitter is also an option (although the medium makes it harder to communicate IMO), use the #haskell tag.

My personal preference was to use r/haskellquestions and read answers on StackOverflow, but I recognize that may not work for everyone.


Operating system

Usually, you do not have flexibility in what operating system you can use. This section only applies in case you do have that flexibility.

In my experience, most Haskellers use Linux, followed by macOS, followed by Windows. While Haskell certainly does work fine (with some caveats) on all three platforms, if it possible for you to use the more popular platforms and you are comfortable doing so, you should do so, as this makes it easier for more people to help you.

Build tools

For any non-trivial project, you’re going to need a build tool, instead of running the compiler by hand.

I recommend using stack or cabal v2-build (also called “new-build” or “Nix-style” builds). I use stack most of the time, but I’ve used cabal v2-build on occasion and it works fine.

If you bump across instructions to use cabal install foo or cabal sandbox foo, stop and retreat. That advice is most likely outdated, don’t follow it.

Some people use the nix package manager. I recommend not using nix when you’re starting out because it is relatively complex and has less beginner-friendly documentation compared to stack.

OGH18’s “Build tools and …” section provides a good mental model for stack. This is super important! Read it.

Editor support

There are varying levels of support for Haskell in different editors via plugins. They’re based on different projects such as intero, HIE (Haskell IDE engine), dante and more.

In my experience, tools/plugins based on intero seem to work the most reliably. I’ve had success with using intero based plugins in Spacemacs and VS Code.

To be clear, I’m not saying “just use Intero”. If you’re able to get other things to work for you, great! All I’m saying is, do try an intero based plugin if all else fails for you.

ghci - The REPL

Your Haskell installation should come with a REPL called ghci. Here are a few tricks that I find super useful -


hoogle is a Haskell-specific search engine where you can not only search for functions/modules/packages by name, but also by type (well, at least for functions anyways). From my POV, Hoogle is invaluable in the process of learning to think with types. I encourage using it on a regular basis.

Hoogle can also be set up to work locally (see the Readme for details). In case you don’t want to do that, you might find it helpful to set up a browser shortcut to use online Hoogle.

In Firefox specifically, these are called “custom search engines”. If you set up Firefox sync, you can use the same shortcut with Firefox on your phone, so that you can quickly hoogle things while you’re sitting on the toilet. You’re welcome.

If you use DuckDuckGo as your search engine, it already has several shortcuts that make searching using Hoogle and Hackage easy. (h/t @Warbo for the tip!)


hlint is an excellent linter that will suggest improvements to your code. In some languages, you might have had a bad experience with linters being excessively naggy. hlint isn’t like that. It’s kinda’ like having a senior Haskeller sitting by your side helping you out. Use it!

Online compiler

Sometimes you want to share code with a friend or someone else to show what you’re trying to do/getting stuck at.

You can use as an online compiler for this, making it easier for others to help you. It allows you to run code as well.

(I’m sure other similar services exist, this is just one example.)

Setting up CI

Setting up CI can be frustrating sometimes. Like with a lot of programming problems, it can be solved by copy-and-paste.

If you’re using stack as your build tool, the documentation describes how to setup Travis CI here.

Dmitrii Kovanikov has written a neat how-to guide for setting up CI for both stack and cabal.

If you want something more flexible, you have a couple of options:

There are also several orbs for CircleCI (h/t /u/TheDataAngel for the suggestion).

If you’re using Gitlab to host your source code, Gitlab CI is also a solid option. For example, here is a simple CI file to get you started (it uses an older Haskell version though, so you’ll need to update that accordingly).


Which library do I use for X?

Consult the Aelve guide and State of the Haskell ecosystem for recommendations.

You can also use packdeps to see which libraries are dependencies of several other libraries, to estimate popularity (h/t /u/Pcarbonn for the suggestion).

Pick a library that is well documented. Your future self will thank you.

Do not rely on search hits for old (read: 5+ years) blog posts or old StackOverflow answers.

If still in doubt, ask.

Don’t use a custom Prelude

Prelude is the module that is automatically imported in every Haskell module. Unlike some other languages, Haskell has many different custom Preludes, written by different groups of people, which have different trade-offs.

Stick to the default Prelude that comes with the base standard library. Don’t use a custom Prelude while you’re a beginner.

Your code

Application architecture

Depending on your experience in other languages, the application architecture you might be comfortable with may not work well in Haskell.

Also, it’s almost impossible to provide general advice here.

Ask others for a spot-check or help for your specific problem.

Pure functions

Are the best thing since sliced bread.

This is not a Haskell-specific idea. In other communities, it is often phrased as “functional core, imperative shell”.

Learning how to make most of your code rely mostly on pure functions is kinda’ important. As a beginner, it might be hard to avoid making most of your code pure (say 80%+). That’s ok. Ask people for tips on how to do so. If the solutions are understandable (i.e. don’t seem too complicated), try them out. If the suggested solutions seem too complicated, leave them for a bit and try them out later when you’re more comfortable.

Partial functions

Don’t write them. Your future self will be thankful.

Don’t use them. Most commonly, this comes up when working with lists, as some of the functions in base do not have sufficiently precise types. Trying using NonEmpty from Data.List.NonEmpty if you can.

If you really must, use a partial function but write a short justification in a comment for why there won’t be any exceptions thrown. Sometimes, trying to write that justification will uncover a bug in your reasoning.

If you really must use a partial function, strongly consider crashing with an informative error message (that helps you locate the failure source quickly), and an explanation for why you’re crashing (to recall why you expect the invariant to hold in the first place). By default, GHC will not emit stack traces, so your program might crash with a generic “element not found in Map” or “Vector index out of bounds” which is not helpful, especially if you need to perform these operations in several places.

-- ! is the indexing operator which throws an exception on failure
-- BAD

let user = usersMap Map.! userId

-- !? is the indexing operator that returns a Maybe in case the key isn't found

-- We only hand out userIds for those users which are present in the map,
-- and we never delete users, so the lookup shouldn't fail.
let errorMsg i = error "Couldn't find user " ++ show i " in userMap." in
let user = fromMaybe (errorMsg userId) (usersMap Map.!? userId)

-- fromMaybe :: a -> Maybe a -> a comes from Data.Maybe in base

IO related functions are somewhat notorious for throwing exceptions for relatively common errors, such as a missing file. Try to be extra careful and think about possible failure modes that you want to address when working with functions in IO.

Using records

Haskell’s built-in records work just fine for small to medium applications. If you’re having problems with duplicate field names (or constructor names), add a prefix corresponding to the data type to please the compiler. Do not use the DuplicateRecordFields extension. It often creates more problems than it solves, and by that time it might be too late.

You will see the lens library recommended in several places. You may even hear extreme takes like “programming without lens is like having your hands tied behind you back”. Ignore, define some helper functions (very often, this is good enough), and move on.

If you really must use a lens library (to see what all the fuss is all about or otherwise), I recommend using microlens (or microlens-platform). Read this lens tutorial, it will cover a large fraction of your use cases.

(Note: The tutorial refers to the lens library, not microlens. Roughly speaking, you can replace the Control.Lens in the tutorial with Lens.Micro and the code will still work.)

Error handling

For libraries

Define custom error ADTs as appropriate. Sometimes, these may be for one specific function, or they may be shared for a few specific function. Even if it just used by one function, please define it separately! Try to avoid boolean blindness (sometimes also manifests as Maybe blindness).

Return Either MyError [..] from the function that might fail.

Usually, there is no good reason to deviate from this. One such good reason is that it is super obvious that there is only reason for failure (and it will continue to be like that), in which case, using Maybe is fine.

For applications

The error handling strategy will depend on overall application architecture.

When in doubt, default to the simple strategy of using Either as documented above. If still concerned, ask someone.

One difference from libraries it is more likely that you want to aggregate errors, instead of exiting at the first error. In such a situation, you can either use Either [MyError] (simple and no additional dependencies, but doesn’t have the semantics of “aggregate errors”) or use the Validation data type (that library has a heavy dependency footprint).

Or you can roll your own data type similar to Validation and avoid the dependency. Don’t forget to give proper attribution.


hspec is a good option for writing and organizing tests.

If you’re interested in trying out property-based testing, I recommend using hedgehog. Quickcheck is more well-known I think, and it is also a fine option.

You can write documentation tests too using doctest

Abstraction (alt. but ma’, I wanna’ be one of the cool kids!)

Try not to over-abstract. When writing Haskell, it is extremely tempting to build more sophisticated abstractions, to the detriment of everything else.

Meme: (child) Gamora: “Did you use every abstraction possible?”. Thanos, “Yes.”. Gamora: “And what did it cost?”. Thanos (on the verge of tears), “Everything.”

On reddit, or mailing lists, or on Twitter, or elsewhere, you’ll often find people talking about things that sound really cool. For example, recently, there is a lot of hype around dependent(-ish) types and algebraic effects. To be honest, I don’t really understand all the tradeoffs around these myself, and I’ve been writing Haskell on and off for about 18 months now.

People don’t talk all that much about code that uses simple patterns, because it is “boring”. In my view, your first task as a beginner is to learn to write “boring” code well.

The best code is the code that doesn’t exist. The next best code is the one that compiles without type errors for reasons that you understand.


You might think “oh no, I can’t print debug in Haskell inside pure functions :frowning:”. You’re wrong (kinda’)! Use the Debug.Trace module for quick print debugging. Once you’re done debugging, delete the import. My “trick” for this is to do import qualified Debug.Trace as D so that the compiler warns me about unused imports once I remove all calls to trace in the module.

Using a proper debugger

ghci has a debugger.

I haven’t really used it in practice, so I can’t really comment on the experience. Sorry.


GHC optimizes code fairly well, so normally you shouldn’t be facing major problems with execution speed (throughput) for a beginner/intermediate project. However, in case you do, threading timing everywhere is kinda’ tedious and annoying (because you want the core of the code to be pure).

You can use GHC’s built-in instrumentation profiling. Long story short, it will generate a report (either human readable or in JSON for consumption by other tools) that shows how much time different functions take to run.

For simple cases, reading the profile manually is sufficient. For more complex situations, I’ve used flamegraph and highly recommend it. You can use ghc-prof-aeson-flamegraph as glue to convert GHC’s JSON-formatted profile to something suitable for flamegraph.

# Make sure that ghc-prof-aeson-flamegraph is on your $PATH.
stack install ghc-prof-aeson-flamegraph

# git clone
# cd myproject

# The work-dir option prevents stack from overwriting your default build.
# Otherwise, rebuilding with/without profiling will overwrite your builds,
# meaning that you need to recompile a LOT of code again and again.
#                         ↓
stack build --profile --work-dir=".profile-dir"
#           ^-- instrument the binary for profiling
#               this can result in a 3~10x slowdown

#        Ask the RTS to record a profile using the json (j) format ↓
stack exec --work-dir=".profile-dir" mybinary -- myinput.csv +RTS -pj

cat | ghc-prof-aeson-flamegraph | ../FlameGraph/ > graph.svg
# open graph.svg in a browser

/u/gilmi recommends profiteur and profiterole for exploring profiles. To install them, I recommend using stack install profiteur profiterole, instead of cabal install (as suggested in the profiteur instructions), to avoid package conflicts in the future.

I’m still concerned …

why are there so many language extensions? (alt. why is there no standard Haskell)

It’s a matter of experimentation. Haskell is both a research language and an industrial language. Don’t worry about this. It’s mostly not gonna’ affect your day-to-day work.

I’m mostly in agreement with the list of 34 default extensions in OGH18. That doesn’t mean you need those extensions. You probably don’t need most of them as a beginner. It means that those extensions are relatively harmless.

Sometimes, GHC will suggest enabling a language extension because it thinks you want a particular language feature based on some code you wrote. Nothing bad’s gonna happen, trust me. Just enable it. Worst thing that might happen is you get a confusing type error. Most likely, your code is gonna’ compile and everything’s fine and rosy. One exception to this rule (in my experience) is AllowAmbiguousTypes. Sometimes when GHC suggests using it, there’s a bug in your code and you should specify the types of intermediate computations.

There will be a point at which you will run into the monomorphism restriction. It might sound scary, but it is mostly annoying, not scary. You will land at this question on StackOverflow. You will read the answers and your problem will be solved. It is known.

Closing thoughts

When in doubt, please ask for help. You miss 100% of the thunks you don’t force (try not to over think it, this analogy doesn’t really work).

Happy Haskelling.


Thanks to /u/TracyChavez for this comment which prompted me to write this post.