3 ms·

I think you haven’t read much of the literature and don’t have any real experience with it on a real project. There is no intuition when it comes to programmin

I think you haven’t read much of the literature and don’t have any real experience with it on a real project. There is no intuition when it comes to programming. Everyone has to learn it. You’re appealing to familiarity of concepts you’ve already learned and assume everyone else thinks the same way. There are highly efficient graph algorithms using pure immutable data structures. You don’t seem to be aware of how much sharing is enabled by immutability nor the algorithms for efficiently updating graphs in a pure functional way. Try reading this book [0]. Again there is a whole zoo of optimizations available exclusively to pure functional languages that you don’t seem to be aware of. Try reading Counting Immutable Beans. Some of the optimizations GHC can do are impressive. It’s not all bad performance. Want to talk about cache misses? Check out an average C++ code base. It has a dedicated cache-miss operator. Side effects are everywhere. And yes, in a purely reverentially transparent language, it becomes a pain being forced to be explicit about every mutation, network call, and file handle operation when you’re used to throwing caution to the wind and flying free with them. Improper handling of side effects include common use-after-free errors, etc. After years of dealing with this mud all of software, at least for me, explicit handling of effects becomes exactly what you want in order to keep your sanity intact. [0] https://books.google.ca/books/about/Purely_Functional_Data_Structures.html https://books.google.ca/books/about/Purely_Functional_Data_S...

badsectoracula 4y ago
> There is no intuition when it comes to programming. Everyone has to learn it. There is no intuition in anything aside from the very few things we are born with. Everything else is learned from experiences. And to that end, chances are someone has learned to follow procedure-like steps like a recipe at a very early age - indeed, in some schoolbooks recipes and other "procedural" works are among the first things someone does. Children learn things like "to do X, first do Y and then Z" from a much earlier age, often before even learning how to read and write (e.g. via simple papercrafting in kindergarden) than something like "X = Y*Z". Giving and taking commands (i.e. "imperative" programming) as a concept is something people meet in their lives much sooner and are more exposed to than abstract problems.
- agentultra 4y ago
  I think the jury is out on which programming paradigm is easier to teach to kindergarten aged children. Let alone adults with no prior training with programming. I don't believe it's as natural as you seem to think.

badsectoracula 4y ago

> There is no intuition when it comes to programming. Everyone has to learn it. There is no intuition in anything aside from the very few things we are born with. Everything else is learned from experiences. And to that end, chances are someone has learned to follow procedure-like steps like a recipe at a very early age - indeed, in some schoolbooks recipes and other "procedural" works are among the first things someone does. Children learn things like "to do X, first do Y and then Z" from a much earlier age, often before even learning how to read and write (e.g. via simple papercrafting in kindergarden) than something like "X = Y*Z". Giving and taking commands (i.e. "imperative" programming) as a concept is something people meet in their lives much sooner and are more exposed to than abstract problems.

agentultra 4y ago
I think the jury is out on which programming paradigm is easier to teach to kindergarten aged children. Let alone adults with no prior training with programming. I don't believe it's as natural as you seem to think.