3 ms·

You're influenced by only one part of FP world. Let's take Lisp, or even better: Scheme. * pure functions - all you said is equally true for Scheme * imm

You're influenced by only one part of FP world. Let's take Lisp, or even better: Scheme. * pure functions - all you said is equally true for Scheme * immutability - set-cdr! and many SRFIs: vectors, boxes, records... * curried by default - nope, not in Scheme either There are other flavours of FP languages other than ML descendants. They are not "less functional" at all.

chc 11y ago
It's true, not every language goes all-in on functional programming — but just because some functional languages are less strongly functional than others, that doesn't mean it makes sense to call every language currently in use a functional language. I mean, it seems pretty useless to define "functional programming language" in a way that includes both C and OCaml just because you can pass functions around in both of them.