6 ms·

Every time I read articles about functional programming, I feel like I’m being talked down to. There is always an air of condescension, which, honestly, makes t

by Osiris 4y ago

Every time I read articles about functional programming, I feel like I’m being talked down to. There is always an air of condescension, which, honestly, makes the content hard to get through. This article uses a lot of this type of language calling one way of doing something “insane”. He says things like “dirty nappy” and “or just get rid of it”. If functional programming is so great, it should be able to stand on its own merits without the constant insults thrown at other programming paradigms. I lean more towards FP than OOP but there are times when each paradigm makes sense in a specific situation (especially because we rely on a lot of third party code we can’t control). > Who on earth would craft such a ghastly abomination? > It may come as a surprise to hear that we can write full, everyday applications along the lines of the functional analog above. > It is obnoxiously verbose and, as it happens, bad practice > I avoid using this like a dirty nappy. There's really no need when writing functional code. > If you are the micro-optimization sort, please close this book. If you cannot get your money back, perhaps you can exchange it for something more fiddly. To be fair, the later chapters are much more focused solely on FP without the disparaging comments toward OOP.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
chrisweekly 4y ago
I like this guy's take on "OO" https://medium.com/javascript-scene/the-two-pillars-of-javascript-ee6f3281e7f3 https://medium.com/javascript-scene/the-two-pillars-of-javas...
nextos 4y ago
For a critical view of all programming paradigms see: https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html (late drafts are available online). A summary is available in: https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/VanRoyChapter.pdf https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/VanRoyChapter.pdf One of the running themes is the paradigm paradox: "More is not better (or worse) than less, just different". In other words, each paradigm has its own distinct advantages, which are discussed both in practical terms and using formal semantics.
epgui 4y ago
IMO the author was just attempting to make his text engaging and approachable, but people have personalities, and some personality quirks can rub certain people the wrong way. There is no shortage of drier materials on the subject!
- esperent 4y ago
  I've written a lot of tutorial material. Not sure if that qualifies me to comment here but... One aspect of my personality is that I'm a snarky cynical bastard who loves to confront perceived flaws in things via jokes. So how does this come across in my tutorial writing? Not at all. That part of my personality is completely absent (I hope) from anything I create that is intended to teach people. Because the people I want to teach programming to could be anybody. They could be someone who can barely speak English and will just be totally confused by snark. They could be a precocious ten year old whom I would rather not expose to my adult cynicism. They'll get enough of it in life anyway. Teaching materials should be clear, cynicism and snark free, and should never be condescending to either the reader or any alternative technology or point of view. That doesn't mean criticism free. But the criticism should feel balanced. Does comparing the alternative with a dirty nappy feel balanced to you?
  - epgui 4y ago
    I agree with you. I was merely describing what I thought the author was trying to do. I wasn’t necessarily suggesting we give them a medal for style. This being said, if you understand the author’s intention, it’s much easier to focus on the substance of the text, which IMO is the more important part here.
    - esperent 4y ago
      > if you understand the author’s intention, it’s much easier to focus on the substance of the text, which IMO is the more important part here In that case we're back to the original criticism which is that proponents of functional programming have a marked tendency to be snarky and condescending towards other programming paradigms and that (regardless of whether they are right or not) this is weird and off-putting to people who just want to learn what functional programming is and make up their own minds about it. Every group of people develop a culture and for some reason the group of people who are into FP have developed a culture of condescension and self righteousness (+). That's certainly worthy of criticism. This piece of writing would be better off without dirty nappy references and if they were absent, we'd be discussing the content rather than the tone. Or possibly even just reading and learning from it which I have to assume is the author's intention. (+) Of course not all of them, and I have read through the introduction of this book and it's not the worst in this regard. It's just frustrating is all.
carapace 4y ago
Have you tried reading "Can programming be liberated from the von Neumann style?: a functional style and its algebra of programs" by Backus? https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/359576.359579 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/359576.359579
DeathArrow 4y ago
> Every time I read articles about functional programming, I feel like I’m being talked down to. I don't. There are lots of good functional programming resources where the author is polite and civil. Being condescendent is not an attribute of functional programming. Example: https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/ https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/

by Osiris 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

chrisweekly 4y ago

I like this guy's take on "OO" https://medium.com/javascript-scene/the-two-pillars-of-javascript-ee6f3281e7f3 https://medium.com/javascript-scene/the-two-pillars-of-javas...

nextos 4y ago

For a critical view of all programming paradigms see: https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html (late drafts are available online). A summary is available in: https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/VanRoyChapter.pdf https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/VanRoyChapter.pdf One of the running themes is the paradigm paradox: "More is not better (or worse) than less, just different". In other words, each paradigm has its own distinct advantages, which are discussed both in practical terms and using formal semantics.

epgui 4y ago

IMO the author was just attempting to make his text engaging and approachable, but people have personalities, and some personality quirks can rub certain people the wrong way. There is no shortage of drier materials on the subject!

esperent 4y ago
I've written a lot of tutorial material. Not sure if that qualifies me to comment here but... One aspect of my personality is that I'm a snarky cynical bastard who loves to confront perceived flaws in things via jokes. So how does this come across in my tutorial writing? Not at all. That part of my personality is completely absent (I hope) from anything I create that is intended to teach people. Because the people I want to teach programming to could be anybody. They could be someone who can barely speak English and will just be totally confused by snark. They could be a precocious ten year old whom I would rather not expose to my adult cynicism. They'll get enough of it in life anyway. Teaching materials should be clear, cynicism and snark free, and should never be condescending to either the reader or any alternative technology or point of view. That doesn't mean criticism free. But the criticism should feel balanced. Does comparing the alternative with a dirty nappy feel balanced to you?
- epgui 4y ago
  I agree with you. I was merely describing what I thought the author was trying to do. I wasn’t necessarily suggesting we give them a medal for style. This being said, if you understand the author’s intention, it’s much easier to focus on the substance of the text, which IMO is the more important part here.
  - esperent 4y ago
    > if you understand the author’s intention, it’s much easier to focus on the substance of the text, which IMO is the more important part here In that case we're back to the original criticism which is that proponents of functional programming have a marked tendency to be snarky and condescending towards other programming paradigms and that (regardless of whether they are right or not) this is weird and off-putting to people who just want to learn what functional programming is and make up their own minds about it. Every group of people develop a culture and for some reason the group of people who are into FP have developed a culture of condescension and self righteousness (+). That's certainly worthy of criticism. This piece of writing would be better off without dirty nappy references and if they were absent, we'd be discussing the content rather than the tone. Or possibly even just reading and learning from it which I have to assume is the author's intention. (+) Of course not all of them, and I have read through the introduction of this book and it's not the worst in this regard. It's just frustrating is all.

carapace 4y ago

Have you tried reading "Can programming be liberated from the von Neumann style?: a functional style and its algebra of programs" by Backus? https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/359576.359579 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/359576.359579

DeathArrow 4y ago

> Every time I read articles about functional programming, I feel like I’m being talked down to. I don't. There are lots of good functional programming resources where the author is polite and civil. Being condescendent is not an attribute of functional programming. Example: https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/ https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/