Additionally, throwing yet more syntax/features at a language to make it pseudo-functional doesn't appeal to everyone. A grab bag of features doesn't an appealing language make (for some).
Unless we mean to use the word “pragmatic” in the sense of “I like it, therefore it’s pragmatic” in which case we’ve entered circlejerk territory and the article should be flagged as such. But again, let’s be charitable and talk about what really is a pragmatic programming language.
As it stands, any competitors of F# are in more serious competition with C#. They just don’t know it. It’s worth discussing if we want to discuss pragmatic languages.
People forget their history lessons. This is exactly why and how C++ gained the massive adoption over C that it did. It allowed itself to be used as the Swiss knife of systems programming, and developers did what they wanted/needed to to get the job done. For every C89 (or Heaven forbid pre-standard C) purist, plentiful C++ programmers arose. And C# is entering that territory by stippling things on and incorporating them into its syntax. F# is excellent as a barometer in this regard. Good for testing the waters with a certain crowd and taking what works.
I don’t need to claim people aren’t “smart/brave” enough to point this out. That’s not what it’s about at all. It’s more about looking one or two steps ahead rather than looking at the here and now.
So, is Gleam pragmatic? Well, is it more pragmatic than C#?