3 ms·
He basically seems to have come to the conclusion (even moreso in more recent posts) that functional languages are not the way to go, so I'm not sure it's the b
by radarsat1 15y ago
He basically seems to have come to the conclusion (even moreso in more recent posts) that functional languages are not the way to go, so I'm not sure it's the best starting point unless that's where you want to end up.
- silentbicycle 15y agoNot really - he's very positive about Erlang, for example. He thinks that going for absolute functional purity is not worth the effort, but that mostly functional (or functional-by-default) is very practical. I tend to agree. His criticism is pretty fair, too - far more substance than a dozen "oh wow, look at how small quicksort / fibonacci is" blog posts.
- stephth 15y agoI've read some of James Hague's more recent posts on FP, and I got the same idea from them than @radarsat1. But more importantly, until I see someone adopting FP for the game logic in a innovative game - re-writing Pacman doesn't have the challenges of programming something while inventing it - and concluding that it is beneficial, more productive game design with FP is an unproven idea. See @eru's answer with the Tim Sweeney talk.