3 ms·

I'm positing that any project of sufficient complexity is a good candidate for object oriented, yes. I don't see how a single developer can reason about an ent

• jlg23 5y ago
  Functional programmers argue that pure functions are easier to reason about than functions that drag in state (like methods in OOP tend to).
  • na85 5y ago
    Please list some real-world software of significant complexity that is 100% purely functional.
    • jlg23 5y ago
      Where does the "100% purely functional" requirement come from? By some strict definition, this is impossible, because you'd not have any means of communicating the result of your computation. In pure OOP speak: A "final static" method is easier to reason about than some non-static, non-final method. (But when a method is defined as "final" and "static", the providing class only serves as a namespace - where is the OOP in that?)
    • toomanydoubts 5y ago
      Hasura, Pandoc, XMonad?
• toomanydoubts 5y ago
  You should probably try writing something under a functional paradigm, emphasizing immutability and pure functions. You'll quickly see how that will help you reason about a large functional project.