2 ms·
Why does "Typed Functional Programming" have to be measurably "better" then OOP or procedural programming in order for Haskell to be considered a good language?
by solomonb 7y ago
Why does "Typed Functional Programming" have to be measurably "better" then OOP or procedural programming in order for Haskell to be considered a good language?
All those questions at the end of your comment can be turned around the other way and are equally valid and unanswerable.
- crimsonalucard 7y agoWhy use it if it's not measure-ably better on some metric? It's important because we should only use things if they are better or the same. Not if they are worse. Sure, there are tradeoffs but if you quantify all tradeoffs something usually comes out better.
- bawolff 7y agoIf you can objectively measure the quality of a program (in a non-bs) way, you could probably make millions. There are whole industries around code health metrics.
- crimsonalucard 7y agoI doubt I could make billions. I don't think it's that hard.