I really want effects to shine and thrive, but since this is a very academic topic, only academic people engage with the research and it comes with academic pedantism, perfectionist worldview, strange attraction to beautiful consistency, etc. This automatically places effect research FAR from any practicality and grounded realism. 2 points, as examples:
1. Ever tried adding a simple print statement for debugging purposes while coding in effectful lang? compiler: "NNNOOOOO!!!! THIS IS AN ERROR; I WILL NEVER COMPILE THIS NONSENSE YOU __MUST__ SPECIFY CONSOLE EFFECT WAAARGHH!11"
2. multi-resumable stacks. how many times you really want to implement custom backtracking for multi resumable computations? this is such an obscure nonsensical use case that is hard to nearly impossible to solve efficiently, but everyone wants to support it. supporting this adds enormous complexity and kills any potential for performance. WHYYYYYYYYY. and yet they focus on this as a holy grail feature but whever there is a showcase they use synthetic "choice" example, lol.
To be fair, presumably debug printig could be "escaped" from the effect type checking if the designer of an effect system would want it. For instance, debug printig in Haskell completely sidesteps the need for the IO Monad and just prints in whatever context
yeah, most times its solved by side-stepping the strict type system and making an exception for debug prints. but this is not a real practical solution, this is a stupid workaround born from overinsistence on "beautiful" design choices.
It seems to me like a pragmatic compromise and very much a real solution. What would you consider a real solution that isn’t overinsisting on beautiful design choices?
putting strong static type system into optional compiler pass. yes, I know this may be null is some cases, let me run my program for now, I know what I am doing. yes, there are unhandled effects or wrong signature, just let me run my test. yes, that type is too generic, i will fix it later, let me run my god damn program.
This puts a lot of extra conditions on the runtime; you basically have to implement a "dynamically typed" runtime like Javascript. In doing so you lose a lot of performance. Google have invested something like a century of man-hours into V8 and on typical benchmarks the performance is about half of Java's, which in turn is typically about half of C / Rust's performance. That's a pretty big compromise for some.