3 ms·
> Or take functional programming as another example. Arguably, about 80% of it is incredibly useful and makes for much better code. Taken to its ultimate conclu
by vmchale 6y ago
> Or take functional programming as another example. Arguably, about 80% of it is incredibly useful and makes for much better code. Taken to its ultimate conclusion in purely functional languages, things like doing I/O get a lot more difficult compared to strict languages.
The author seems to be quite confused about functional programming.
- rhn_mk1 6y agoCould you explain?
- mattgreenrocks 6y agoThere's nothing wrong with pure functional programming that requires you to constrain effectful computations to certain source code areas. That other languages allow something as innocuous as `getName()` to also call `launchMissiles()` under the hood is wrong. Pure FP langs slapping you on the wrist for trying that is part of their value proposition. It's akin to saying, "why does C worry so much about memory allocation? It should know when I'm done with resources!"
- vmchale 6y agoWell, for one, "pure" and "strict" need not be opposed. You can have a strict language with an IO monad, and some people actually prefer that.