PureScript vs C#
When comparing PureScript vs C#, the Slant community recommends PureScript for most people. In the question“What are the best languages for learning functional programming?” PureScript is ranked 10th while C# is ranked 25th. The most important reason people chose PureScript is:
Has Typeclasses and RankNTypes
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Higher kinded types
Has Typeclasses and RankNTypes

Pro High performance FFI code
The Eff monad, which is used for FFI code, optimizes out calls to bind, and supports tail call optimization, resulting in clean, efficient Javascript. The psc compiler also specifically recognizes the ST monad, and transforms scoped variables into mutable Javascript variables, for even more efficient code.
Pro Type safety
Compiling should be your first unit test. A tight type system (static and hopefully strong) will catch many logic errors that are often difficult to spot through debugging. In languages like PureScript, if it compiles, it often runs properly.
Pro Pure functional language
You cannot have side effects, unless a function is explicitly defined as so.
Pro Modules can be compiled to CommonJS
Modules compiled to CommonJS can be included with 'require', making it incredibly simple to call Purescript code from Javascript.
Pro Has row polymorphism and extensible effects
Pro FFI
FFI system is quite good and easy to use. You can import functions curried or not curried. Records and arrays use native JS objects and arrays.
Pro Thorough documentation
The Purescript website has fairly thorough documentation for all of the language's features, and the Purescript blog contains several examples of practical usage.
Pro Awesome web frameworks
Thermite (React)
Halogen (VDOM, similar to ELM)
And hit these up with Signals, Isolated/(Managed?) Components, powerful functions and FFI
Pro Versatile
.NET offers rich functionality.
Pro Visual Studio
The Visual Studio IDE offers one of the best development environments. The Community Edition and Visual Studio Code can be used for free.
Pro Forms
Can be designed visually with the Visual Studio designer for traditional Windows forms, WPF, or Web forms.
Pro 3rd Party support
Lot's of tools and libraries available.
Pro Can be used in a variety of fields
With Xamarin for Mobile (ios, android),
with .net core asp for server (linux, windows),
with .net core for desktop (windows, mac),
with mono for desktop (windows, linux),
with blazor for web client with webassembly.
However, it is not considered top for any of those categories, but it is top choice for Windows desktop with .net framework and top choice for Unity.
.net 5 will unify frameworks similar to JVM (just one).
Pro Cross-Platform
Runs on Linux, Mac, and Windows.
Pro Supported By Microsoft
Constant updates and bug fixes to many popular frameworks, as well as great first-party support from Microsoft. This can be a con as well in certain circumstances.
Pro It is a C like language
Being a C like language counts in favor for it as a general purpose programming language, given the ease of using existing skills to pick up this language easily.
There are other superior languages that could be used as a general purpose, such as: F#, Haskell, but the complexity of those languages, being functional, make them strange to the usual C Syntax.
C# is better than C whenever garbage collection, Objects, classes, data access, are needed. But C is going to be the choice when hardware access and performance are paramount.
Cons
Con Lots of dependencies needed to get started
Purescript is written in Haskell, but meant to be used with Node.js. As a result, to get started , users must install ghc, cabal, node.js, grunt, and bower. Purescript also has its own compiler, and different semantics form Haskell, and so even after installing, there's still some overhead to getting productive with Purescript.
Con Lack of good IDE/tooling support
Con Documentation not updated
Con Ecosystem not stable
Con Restrictive FFI
Functions exported are all curried, and must be called as such from Javascript. The FFI syntax for importing Javascript functions, while slightly simpler and more readable than UHC/Fay's, means that calls to methods on objects must be wrapped to pass the object explicitly as a parameter.
Con Slow compilation
On large project, for example Halogen
Con Learning curve
For a beginner the .NET framework can be daunting, the rich functionality means that things often can be done in several ways.
Con Very large runtime
Cannot be used for embedded programming.
Con Microsoft will mess up with the Visual studio installation
And all of a sudden you'll need to reinstall the entire thing just because it stopped working.
Microsoft assumes that every workstation is connected to the Internet then it is always pushing updates.
Con .NET is a mess
Troublesome in regards to being Microsoft centric, updates, security, excessively large, cross-platform issues, etc...
Con Windows OS centric
Not very good at being a cross-platform programming language.
Con Strictly object oriented
Con Owned by Microsoft
And like always, Microsoft is to be avoided, no exceptions.
