3 ms·

Yes because for loops are syntax sugar around gotos. It all boils down to the same thing. However maps can be determined to be turing incomplete if the mapped f

Yes because for loops are syntax sugar around gotos. It all boils down to the same thing. However maps can be determined to be turing incomplete if the mapped function has no function calls and no loops and if the input list is not infinite. This means that it's suitable for a wide range of dsls that would like to know if programs are susceptible to the halting problem (e.g. bpf -which doesnt have maps but I think it could...)

crimsonalucard 9y ago
You just said a for loop returns no results. I responded saying that it can via an accumulator or mutating the original list... Are you indicating in your latest response that I am correct and your original statement is incorrect? You seem to be going in on a tangent... Where is this going?
- mclehman 9y ago
  Returning a result and modifying a data structure you've decided to use as an accumulator are two different things. Modifying the original structure is even more different. Most of the traditionally non-functional languages don't support loops as expressions.
  - crimsonalucard 9y ago
    Yes, I get what your saying, but I can implement the map filter and reduce abstractions with a for loop using this accumulator pattern or pass in the parameter by value (aka copy) then modify the original structure. If I can implement MAP using a FOR loop then they are relatively the same thing as I can just replace a MAP with it's FOR loop definition and get the same result. Here's my main point. There is no meaningful change to your imperative program when you replace for loops with maps. The core structure of your code is exactly the same. What you have introduced is a convenience aka sugar. If you were to truly do functional programming the architecture of your entire program will be drastically different from imperative code... To counter the posters original statement: There is a gigantic difference between just using map and reduce in your imperative javascript code vs. actually writing a functional program... It is not a trivial difference. I feel many people who understand javascript fp libraries like underscore think they know functional programming when all their really doing is sprinkling map and reduce all over their imperative code. You guys don't get it yet, and you'll never get it if you keep coding in javascript. The difference is night and day, it's like SQL vs python.

crimsonalucard 9y ago

You just said a for loop returns no results. I responded saying that it can via an accumulator or mutating the original list... Are you indicating in your latest response that I am correct and your original statement is incorrect? You seem to be going in on a tangent... Where is this going?

mclehman 9y ago
Returning a result and modifying a data structure you've decided to use as an accumulator are two different things. Modifying the original structure is even more different. Most of the traditionally non-functional languages don't support loops as expressions.
- crimsonalucard 9y ago
  Yes, I get what your saying, but I can implement the map filter and reduce abstractions with a for loop using this accumulator pattern or pass in the parameter by value (aka copy) then modify the original structure. If I can implement MAP using a FOR loop then they are relatively the same thing as I can just replace a MAP with it's FOR loop definition and get the same result. Here's my main point. There is no meaningful change to your imperative program when you replace for loops with maps. The core structure of your code is exactly the same. What you have introduced is a convenience aka sugar. If you were to truly do functional programming the architecture of your entire program will be drastically different from imperative code... To counter the posters original statement: There is a gigantic difference between just using map and reduce in your imperative javascript code vs. actually writing a functional program... It is not a trivial difference. I feel many people who understand javascript fp libraries like underscore think they know functional programming when all their really doing is sprinkling map and reduce all over their imperative code. You guys don't get it yet, and you'll never get it if you keep coding in javascript. The difference is night and day, it's like SQL vs python.