3 ms·
“Functional languages, as Dijkstra complained, tend to force wasting time by copying unnecessarily.” Citation required for your suspect AF appeal to authority/
by hhas01 7y ago
“Functional languages, as Dijkstra complained, tend to force wasting time by copying unnecessarily.”
Citation required for your suspect AF appeal to authority/deathbed conversion story. ’Cos even dead and rotted, the corpse of EWD doesn’t give a flying shit how fast your program is if you cannot prove it right first. The man spent his whole career trying to hammer the rigor of science and mathematics onto the mess that was, and still is, computer programming.
Here’s some of EWD’s actual words:
https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/OtherDocs/Haskell.html https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/OtherDocs...
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EWD1284.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD12xx/EW...
Not exactly the reckless racer boy, he. Perhaps you were thinking of Dennis Ritchie?
.
“When the machines get too complicated to understand, the balance might change. Nobody knows when that might happen, if it ever does”
Um, that balance already tipped on its side a half-century ago, skippy. Try to keep up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Brooks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Brooks
- ncmncm 7y agoGee, you sound bitter. There was a reason I mentioned Dijkstra, but it wasn't an argument, so "appeal to authority" doesn't apply. Common mistake, though. Dijkstra is relevant specifically because he advocated a mathematical approach. If you're actually curious, you can read up on the famous feud with Backus, where Backus was promoting functional programming, and Dijkstra wouldn't give him the time of day. It's pretty amusing, at this remove. My guess is you're bitter because nobody controls important equipment with FP languages; or publicly regrets it when they did. I might be bitter too. But I'm not.