3 ms·

I mean in Java or C# there are "global" objects, being the Main class, I suppose. There's always a top-level construct. But my Sword class doesn't hold a refer

• lostcolony 6y ago
  That was a rhetorical statement. The same reason you don't need global objects in an OO language is the reason you don't need global data structures in an imperative or functional one. Your Sword class doesn't hold a reference to a NetState object, but then, my Sword struct doesn't need a reference to a NetState struct, either. If I were to climb the reference hierarchies back to my 'main' function, I would find a common ancestor, just like in OO if I were to climb my reference hierarchies, I would get back to the class with my 'main' method. But that doesn't imply global state; it's all scoped down in the code where I defined and use it.
  • na85 6y ago
    I haven't the faintest clue what point you're trying to make but I'm sure it's very clever.
    • bcrosby95 6y ago
      The point is the graph of data dependencies in an FP system doesn't necessarily look any different than in an OO one.
      • andi999 6y ago
        Closures and internal state of objects are basically the same thing.
        • throwaway894345 6y ago
          I don't usually deal with stateful closures. In OO we often have file objects, and if you call Close() on said object, subsequent Read() invocations fail because the encapsulated state has changed. What's the closure analog for this?
          • lostcolony 6y ago
            You've never worked with a generator before? That's a stateful function. For throwing after a file handle is closed, something like - const read = (fileHandle) => { return () => { if io:isOpen(fileHandle) && io:hasNext(fileHandle) => { return io:readNext(fileHandle) } else if io:isOpen(fileHandle) {return undefined } else {throw "File is closed"} } }(myFile) read() read() io:close(myFile) read() //throws