7 ms·

The other thing I think is worth considering in a move to Clojure is how different functional thinking is. I mean, if you're used to moving between C and Perl a

by JackC 14y ago

The other thing I think is worth considering in a move to Clojure is how different functional thinking is. I mean, if you're used to moving between C and Perl and Python and PHP and Java and Javascript and so on, you're used to language transitions within more or less the same paradigm. It feels like a categorically different problem to try to transition a team from one of those to a functional language. I'm thinking in particular of this section from O'Reilly's Clojure book: http://books.google.com/books?id=I8KdEKceCHAC&ots=wNiLN6Tce5&pg=PA138 http://books.google.com/books?id=I8KdEKceCHAC&ots=wNiLN6... They lay out a couple of algorithms in an imperative style, and then gradually morph them into a functional style. It's pretty wild: you go from a story, "do this, then do this, then do this" to a math problem: "your answer is a list composed of f() of g() of h() of another list". (Unfortunately you only get snippets from that link -- it's worth the money to get the whole thing if you're interested.) Anyway, having followed through their examples and done some of my own Clojure programming, I ended up not so convinced that people who are good at solving story-style imperative problems will necessarily be good at solving math-style functional problems. It felt like a different part of my brain. This is not at all a reason not to dabble with functional languages, just a potential pitfall to be aware of if you're thinking of bringing a whole team over. And maybe I'm overstating it? I haven't dabbled too much myself.

JeanPierre 14y ago
Anyway, having followed through their examples and done some of my own Clojure programming, I ended up not so convinced that people who are good at solving story-style imperative problems will necessarily be good at solving math-style functional problems. It felt like a different part of my brain. When you're coming to a new paradigm which is completely different from what you're currently using, then of course it will initially feel hard/different and that you're using a different part of your brain. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's harder for you to program in a functional style, it just means that you're more experienced in imperative programming.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
grannyg00se 14y ago
"C and Perl and Python and PHP and Java and Javascript and so on, ... It feels like a categorically different problem to try to transition a team from one of those to a functional language." I just have to throw a flag here and point out that Javascript is also a functional language. With Javascript you can declare functions as variables, pass functions as arguments to other functions, return functions as the result of other functions, and use them as part of a data structure. Javascript is much closer to Scheme than it is to a C paradigm.
- silentbicycle 14y ago
  Well, you can pass around function pointers, return function pointers, and store function pointers in data structures in C, too. You can also use closures - a closure is just a (function pointer, struct with its closure values) struct. Sure, OCaml, Scheme, and company box the pair for you, garbage collect it, and don't make you flatten your code into a single file-level scope, but the difference between Javascript and C isn't as big as you think. Javascript is kinda sorta maybe functional if you look at it right, but it's still mostly the same imperative/object-oriented mishmash as Java, Python, or Ruby.
  - abecedarius 14y ago
    Being able to nest first-class functions without manual closure-conversion / lambda-lifting makes a big difference for the feel of a language, to me. (Java is sort of in between -- it technically has that feature but with verbosity getting seriously in the way of using it.)
    - silentbicycle 14y ago
      Indeed. I'd certainly rather be able to nest functions, but C became a lot more powerful to me after I learned how to compile a bunch of high-level features to it. (Your 'ichbins' helped, by the way. That, LiSP, and some SML papers.) I'd still rather automate much of the heavy lifting, of course. I'm weirded out by the idea of writing CPS-transformed code by hand for node.js, but apparently people like it? Perhaps it's something similar.

by JackC 14y ago

JeanPierre 14y ago

Anyway, having followed through their examples and done some of my own Clojure programming, I ended up not so convinced that people who are good at solving story-style imperative problems will necessarily be good at solving math-style functional problems. It felt like a different part of my brain. When you're coming to a new paradigm which is completely different from what you're currently using, then of course it will initially feel hard/different and that you're using a different part of your brain. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's harder for you to program in a functional style, it just means that you're more experienced in imperative programming.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

grannyg00se 14y ago

"C and Perl and Python and PHP and Java and Javascript and so on, ... It feels like a categorically different problem to try to transition a team from one of those to a functional language." I just have to throw a flag here and point out that Javascript is also a functional language. With Javascript you can declare functions as variables, pass functions as arguments to other functions, return functions as the result of other functions, and use them as part of a data structure. Javascript is much closer to Scheme than it is to a C paradigm.

silentbicycle 14y ago
Well, you can pass around function pointers, return function pointers, and store function pointers in data structures in C, too. You can also use closures - a closure is just a (function pointer, struct with its closure values) struct. Sure, OCaml, Scheme, and company box the pair for you, garbage collect it, and don't make you flatten your code into a single file-level scope, but the difference between Javascript and C isn't as big as you think. Javascript is kinda sorta maybe functional if you look at it right, but it's still mostly the same imperative/object-oriented mishmash as Java, Python, or Ruby.
- abecedarius 14y ago
  Being able to nest first-class functions without manual closure-conversion / lambda-lifting makes a big difference for the feel of a language, to me. (Java is sort of in between -- it technically has that feature but with verbosity getting seriously in the way of using it.)
  - silentbicycle 14y ago
    Indeed. I'd certainly rather be able to nest functions, but C became a lot more powerful to me after I learned how to compile a bunch of high-level features to it. (Your 'ichbins' helped, by the way. That, LiSP, and some SML papers.) I'd still rather automate much of the heavy lifting, of course. I'm weirded out by the idea of writing CPS-transformed code by hand for node.js, but apparently people like it? Perhaps it's something similar.