3 ms·
You're not stupid. Functional programming requires its own way of thinking and it's different from procedural languages with mutable-state soup, like C++. It'
by tempodox 3y ago
You're not stupid. Functional programming requires its own way of thinking and it's different from procedural languages with mutable-state soup, like C++. It's less that OCaml is hard to learn, and more that you have to leave old habits of thinking and learn new ones. Don't give up just yet.
- MaxBarraclough 3y agoRight. Same goes for learning any radically unfamiliar style of programming. There are people who say once you've learned one programming language it's easy to learn any other programming language, but this just isn't true. The differences between languages aren't always skin deep. On the plus side these are the learning curves most worth climbing, as it broadens your understanding. That might be reason enough itself, but it might also make you a better programmer in your usual wheelhouse. Haskell, Forth, and assembly, are worth taking a look at for this reason. If you want to go further down the exotic language rabbit hole, there's Mercury [0] and Joy, [1] both of which I keep meaning to learn. (Hadn't realised until today that they're both from the University of Melbourne.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(programming_language) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_(programming_language)