4 ms·
Agree, and I've written substantial amounts of code in all of them; though I strongly prefer Common Lisp to Clojure unless already chained to the JVM. Besides
by codr7 6y ago
Agree, and I've written substantial amounts of code in all of them; though I strongly prefer Common Lisp to Clojure unless already chained to the JVM.
Besides Prolog & APL, I would add Forth to the list.
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoWhat do you make of Joy, Forth's functional cousin?
- dbcurtis 6y agoIs Joy getting any active development? The only resources I could find with a quick search seem to be almost 20 years old.
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoI think not, unfortunately. The official git repo hasn't been touched in 2 years. [0] More recently though, a brave functional programming adventurer has been working on a Joy compiler written in Haskell, for what that's worth. [1] I skimmed the 'overview' page [2] and it looks unusual enough that I might give it a more serious go at some point. I'm not especially au fait with functional programming, and have only a basic familiarity with Forth, so it's rather alien. Which is of course the appeal. [0] https://github.com/joy-language/joy-lang.org https://github.com/joy-language/joy-lang.org [1] https://github.com/owainlewis/joy https://github.com/owainlewis/joy [2] http://joy-lang.org/overview-of-joy/ http://joy-lang.org/overview-of-joy/
- codr7 6y agoNever did find the motivation to dive into Joy. I did write a lot of Haskell though, and it left a slightly sour taste. I feel the same about statically typed functional programming as about Rust, it's a nice theory but in practice you end up squeezing problems into weird shapes to keep the language happy.