5 ms·
Good point. Added Haskell
by immad 14y ago
Good point. Added Haskell
- DanWaterworth 14y agoLisp, Scheme, Erlang are functional languages, but they are not pure functional languages.
- troels 14y agoAlso, Scheme is Lisp.
- immad 14y agoI was referring to Common Lisp. Corrected it.
- Ralith 14y agoCommon Lisp has more in common with Python and Ruby than Haskell. Perhaps you should study some of these languages before encouraging other people to.
- troels 14y agoArguably, so does Scheme. My impression of Ruby is that it's sort of a bastard of Perl and Scheme.
- Ralith 14y agoI'm a heavy Common Lisp user, but I'm only casually familiar with Scheme, so I opted to leave deconstruction of that aspect to others--such as yourself!
- taybin 14y agoMore like Perl and SmallTalk.
- tsm 14y agoScheme is a bit more biased in favor of functional techniques though. Recursion (in the vast majority of cases CLers will just use (loop) instead of recursing), continuations...
- immad 14y agoEdit: I meant to say functional not pure functional. Blog post changed.
- minimax 14y agoHe's making the distinction between saying a language is "functional" versus "pure functional." It is not correct to classify Lisp and Erlang as pure functional languages, because they both include support for imperative style programming.
- DanWaterworth 14y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purely_functional http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purely_functional
- Ralith 14y agoI question your qualification to advise people on interviews if your own theory knowledge tops out at "casually skimmed a wikipedia page."
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]