I'm writing a parser and I noticed that my code turned out quite a bit simpler when I decided to rename a class to "Tokenized" rather than "Tokenizer". In the

I'm writing a parser and I noticed that my code turned out quite a bit simpler when I decided to rename a class to "Tokenized" rather than "Tokenizer". In the case of C#, Java, et al, I think limiting the type system to “expressing allowable operations” is due to habit and custom rather than something intrinsic to language. In my mind, the purpose of a computation is to create new/more structure so that, on the surface, your program ends up being a series of simple queries rather than a bunch of messy computations using complex algorithms. Classical OOP in which the constructor does the computation and the methods do the querying on the new encapsulated structure seems to be a good fit for that. This is subtly different than treating methods as allowable operations because we’re not concerned with transforming the structure, just asking easy questions about it. So in this way, OOP à la C# is very similar to FP à la Haskell.