4 ms·
Compared with SQL it's definitely imperative. It's definitely using higher-level abstractions than a `for` loop, but it still specifies the order of operations.
by lbarrow 6y ago
Compared with SQL it's definitely imperative. It's definitely using higher-level abstractions than a `for` loop, but it still specifies the order of operations.
- nicoburns 6y ago> it still specifies the order of operations Yes, although not necessarily all of them. Some languages will process this eagerly, some lazily.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- barrkel 6y agoActually it doesn't unless you're assuming eager evaluation and that 'arr' is something like an array, rather than something which monadically collects functions for evaluation later. In C#, the functions being passed could be passed as analyzable syntax trees, and the implementation could actually be in SQL.
- sriram_malhar 6y agonope. Sequencing and imperative have an overlap, but they are not the same thing. Sequencing is a fundamental computing construct. Data flow graphs allow you to specify sequences, just as shell pipelines do. SQL has sequentiality built-in with nested queries. None of these are imperative environments.