Haskell:

惰性计算导致空间泄漏。 数字层次结构不是根据数学抽象构造的。 严格的单元IO会使调试更加困难。 大型实现处理I/O的方式似乎与标准不太兼容。(特别是，输出字符只输出低8位——然后构建代码，使用这个假设来执行二进制I/O。我吐!) ($)运算符的结合性可以被改变以使某些表达式更漂亮。

大多数问题都不会上升到讨厌的程度，有些人试图解决或为每一个问题构建可靠的变通办法。

编辑:关于第5点有些困惑。特别是有些人似乎认为我指的是论证的顺序，但我不是。我不解释我的意思，我只想让人们去下面的链接http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/ChangeDollarAssociativity，它很好地表达了我的意思。

Python

慢 我终于习惯了打印语句，现在有了这个打印函数??(py3k) 从来没有得到py2exe或cxFreeze工作 不标准化(轻微挑剔) 递归深度只有100 (iirc)

F#

Type inference is limited. It propagates forward only. F# won't try to infer an object type based on the methods and properties used: you'll get "lookup of indeterminate object type" errors when it doesn't have a clue. One cannot mix floats and ints: 1 + 2.3 is a type error. It's a little awkward to have to create a builder object in order to define a monad or computation expression. In Haskell or Scala, you can define the monad operations directly on the monadic object. Though the #light syntax is preferred, the indentation rules are sometimes not very intuitive or become cumbersome.

我讨厌Java的五个方面:

没有一级函数。 没有类型推断。 缺乏理智的默认值在eg图形。 NullPointerException不包含更多关于什么是null的信息。 毫无意义的“可配置”框架/服务提供者接口/工厂类/依赖注入系统的激增。可配置性几乎从未使用过，严重违反了DRY，代码的大小增加了四倍，易读性减少了一半。

我知道，我应该试试Scala。

Scala是我最喜欢的语言。五件讨厌的事?容易:

Takes a long time to learn properly. I know you can write Scala as a 'better java'. That is what we used to say about C++ and C too. I agree this is an inevitable consequence of the deep ideas in the language. But still ... Methods vs. Functions: def f(x: Int) = x*x defines a method f, not a function f. Methods are not functions despite a lot of early Scala tutorial material blurring the distinction. The language tries to blur it too because if you supply a method in some places where a function is expected it is accepted. Do we have to have both methods and functions? Yes it is fundamental. But it was initially confusing to me. Composing classes or objects from mixins in the 'cake' pattern is prone to NPE's. e.g. trait X { val host: String; val url = "http://" + host } is a mixin that will NPE on instantiation, or not, depending on its position in the class declaration. The compiler could tell you if it will fail but doesn't. (In 2.7 anyway.) It is hard to diagnose the problem in complex inheritance graphs. Arrays in 2.8 rely on implicits to mesh with the main scala collection types. But implicits are not applied everywhere. An Array can be supplied where a Seq is expected. But an Option[Array] cannot be supplied where an Option[Seq] is expected. I know there are no completely 'right' ways to handle java Arrays. Type erasure. Enough said.

MEL(玛雅表达语言):

Single dimensions arrays: Forcing me to manually sync two or more lists, or use delimited strings to simulate more complex data structures. Naturally, they're immutable too. Single threaded and slow: Causing the entire Maya application to hang while it completes a task. Bonus points for not being able to kill long operations, instead having to close and re-open Maya. Script sourcing paths aren't recursive: Meaning every directory you want to store scripts in must all be added to the script path. No namespaces: Forcing the inconsistent use of naming conventions to make sure global procedures don't collide. Modal commands: Each command is modal, meaning the Create, Modify, and Query operations are all handled by setting flags. This also forced the developers to cause most of the commands to return arrays Inconsistent command style: Most array commands actually return arrays, but the Tokenize command has to take an array as a reference which it then populates, rather than spitting out an array. This among other inconsistencies.

这些以及其他几个原因是AutoDesk采用Python作为次要脚本语言的原因，这带来了其他一些令人讨厌的因素:

并不是所有的MEL命令都受支持:大多数都受支持，但有时您会发现自己不得不使用MEL()函数来执行一些任意代码。更糟糕的是，你不得不对它进行所有烦人的逃避。 继承了模态命令风格:必须使用相同的create=True, query=True, edit=True的东西。