3 ms·
A common argument for functional programming is that it's inherently better suited to parallel hardware [1]. So if you buy this, and agree that future hardware
by T-A 10y ago
A common argument for functional programming is that it's inherently better suited to parallel hardware [1]. So if you buy this, and agree that future hardware is likely to emphasize more cores over faster ones, you have an argument for functional programming being the way of the future.
Of course, this argument has been made at least since the 80s...
[1] http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/293851/what-is-it-about-functional-programming-that-makes-it-inherently-adapted-to-para http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/293851/what-i...
- youdontknowtho 10y agoLike I said, his talk is worth watching. he makes some detailed arguments to back his case. He spends a large part of the talk going over concurrency myths that he's encountered over the years. And even with all of that, his main point was that you should use the scientific method and make measurements and adjust your approach based on those measurements. It's on here somewhere: https://www.infoq.com/author/Martin-Thompson https://www.infoq.com/author/Martin-Thompson