I think that the -ve comments "about literate programming" came from disbelief that the code was executable (due to a combination of the text and the high level language), rather than any strong objection to the idea of literate programming itself.|
I wonder how much the authors annoyed the other people - "too cute for its own good" suggests that the report authors thought the Haskell people were smart-alecs. On the other hand, using higher order functions for the regions does seem perfectly sensible and the results from the grad who learnt Haskell in 8 days were impressive.
About speed - I'd like more details too (and memory use). If you find them in the report, please post. There was a table in which Haskell's speed ("Efficient Execution", Fig 4)) was rated highly (an A, compared to Ada's B-). But why isn't the C++ or Awk entry in that figure?
PS Thanks for the positive comments!