3 ms·
> that will really drive home the importance/benefits of functional programming.. From my experience with Haskell, on a practical level, I think it really come
by imakesnowflakes 11y ago
> that will really drive home the importance/benefits of functional programming..
From my experience with Haskell, on a practical level, I think it really comes down to a guarantee that you will not be able to mess the code up beyond a certain extant.
I am not really sure if it should be attributed to the type system or to functional programming in general. A functional programming language require a really good type system, because you need it maintain sanity with you have to chain together functions a lot more than you do in an imperative language. So I think it has to be a mix of both.
- coolsunglasses 11y agoHaving done Clojure for a living before Haskell, it's the type system, explicit effects, laziness, overall good design, and FP. In that order. But the "FP" part is only tangentially the point unless you take FP to mean "pure functional programming", ie, just a lambda calculus. Having the ability to write "map" and "filter" in your programming language doesn't really do much for you in practice. Believing otherwise is why people thought FP users were nuts for a long time.