3 ms·
I'm in the "yes" camp for FP. At the very least it is accepted as a good thing to add to non FP languages these days (Java8) which is a good enough indicator fo
by kriro 11y ago
I'm in the "yes" camp for FP. At the very least it is accepted as a good thing to add to non FP languages these days (Java8) which is a good enough indicator for me. While not strictly FP, FP ideas have influenced some major successes like say MapReduce.
- pron 11y agoWhat Java added has been part of OOP for 30 years, since before ML (well, around the same time) and Haskell were even invented (let alone Erlang). So I'd put "anonymous functions" in the yes column, but not sure about FP yet.
- fenollp 11y agoErlang is 29 years old
- pron 11y agoHappy birthday! I was being approximate, though, and it turns out that my approximation was way off. Anonymous functions have been part of OO for 43 years, so still long before Erlang (and Haskell).
- kriro 11y agoMy point is that since it was finally added to the most "mainstreamy" non-functional language there is there's some mainstream acceptance. It's not my POV but an interesting data point.