3 ms·

When FP? and When OOP?

• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• cousin_it 6y ago
  SQL is not a functional language. Sure, it's non-OO, in the sense that data structures don't encapsulate functionality, but so is C.
  • brudgers 6y ago
    Functional and object orientation are programming idioms not properties of languages. Few people would argue that Common Lisp is Object Oriented...or at least argue that it is successfully in an online context among Common Lisp users. And while it is easy to argue that Common Lisp is functional in those contexts, it is full of direct paths to mutating state...and even mutating the state of the runtime environment in ways that would make C blush. The advantage of SQL is that it facilitates a declarative idiom that maps well onto the relational algebra. But due to its Turing Completeness [1], the OOP and FP tarpits are possible in theory. None of which changes the big point of the article, what people say about programming languages is what they want to say. People invested in Java as the one true choice will ignore SQL (and people invested in FP will call SQL a FP language). And everyone ignores that it's idioms all the way down. Until you get to the Von Neumann architecture. [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/a/7580013 https://stackoverflow.com/a/7580013
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]