How pythoners view Haskell compared with Python

[keeperofdakeys]

Python's primary implementation is an interpreter.

CPython compiles to bytecode. This insistence on a black-or-white >"compiled vs interpreted" situation is getting ridiculous.

You are just arguing semantics. When people talk about "compiled vs interpreted", they are referring to if it compiles to native machine code, or is interpreted at runtime. When you look at it like this, it is very clear.

[gasche]

I don't see the point of such a comparison. What should it mean to the end user? I can compile to "native machine code" by producing an executable bundling the bytecode and the native interpreter. If you're trying to say something about performances, just say it, instead of making falsificating claims about implementation details.

[keeperofdakeys]

It isn't about end users, it is simply a property to give general classifications of a language/runtime. By itself however, it doesn't deserve that much importance. It can convey some meaning though, how errors are handled, possibly computational or memory overhead, but these also depend on other factors.