3 ms·
You can't even make that guarantee for functional languages. How do I know the built in operators for scala aren't producing side effects without reading the co
by crimsonalucard 9y ago
You can't even make that guarantee for functional languages. How do I know the built in operators for scala aren't producing side effects without reading the code of the compiler itself?
Additionally you should know that functional programming is a lie. Your computer is an imperative machine with no understanding of functional programming. The compiler transforms your functional program into an imperative one.
- gaius 9y agoAdditionally you should know that functional programming is a lie. Your computer is an imperative machine with no understanding of functional programming Yet you program a register machine as if it were a stack machine all the time without batting an eyelid!
- crimsonalucard 9y ago>Because you can't make any guarantees about state in a language that wasn't intended for FP because how do you know what side effects the built-in functions are having This is your original argument. I said that FP programs offer none of the said guarantees because they are at it's core compiled into imperative programs... You responded with a statement about a stack machine being an abstraction over a "register machine." How does the stack machine statement move your original argument forward...? We're getting side tracked here...
- hiptobecubic 9y agoYou don't. It's entirely possible to write not-at-all-functional code in Scala. One of the many reasons I dislike it.
- crimsonalucard 9y agoah never knew that. My mistake. I just chose a random "functional" language as an example.