3 ms·

A useful summary (eg. I found my experimental code from last year a lot easier to understand when it used functions rather than procedures) - though I couldn't

• loup-vaillant 16y ago
  Ah… Do you think I should change my wording? Because if it made you laugh, it could also discredit my point in the eyes of those who don't agree with me in the first place. I'd like to correct that, if possible.
  • 10ren 16y ago
    The wording comes across as dogmatic; yet the article isn't actually dogmatic - it sincerely acknowledges cases where the functional approach isn't suitable (even including the really cool algorithm of quicksort - BTW you might mention games as another one where mutable state is convenient). Showing respect for alternatives (where due) makes an article seem objective, impartial, intellectual and truth-seeking (rather than pushing an agenda; or trying to sell something). It would probably be beneficial if the wording reflected your intent. I did find it distracting, because (to be frank) people don't like to be told what they should be doing; laughter is a way to defuse the affront. Another approach is to appeal to those (few) people who are keen to learn about techniques that will help them. And I really think that that's what you were going for. Changing the wording would help achieve that aim, in my opinion. So... yes. btw: I really liked your explanation of linked lists being cheap to modify; and the article in general is very well done and communicates very effectively - I'd say it's of textbook standard.