4 ms·

Aren't transducers strictly functional terminology? Also, does the name matter if it works the same and has the same properties? Maybe the author called it "p

Aren't transducers strictly functional terminology? Also, does the name matter if it works the same and has the same properties? Maybe the author called it "pipelines" to avoid functional purists from nitpicking it.

_heimdall 2y ago
Yeah I do think of transducers as a functional paradigm, I read the article as describing a very functional paradigm as well. In the context of a specific programming language feature it seems like terminology would be important, I wasn't trying to nitpick unintentionally.
- alganet 2y ago
  It is important for the functional guys, and I recognize the importance it has for them. These "pipelines" and "object streaming" APIs are often built upon OOP. I feel that calling it "transducers" would offend the sensibilities of those who think it must be functional all the way down. Don't you think it's better to keep it with a different name? I mean, even among the functional community itself there seems to be a lot of stress around purity, why would anyone want to make it worse?
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    I may have just misunderstood the OP. It sounded to me like describing the benefits specifically of transducers, but if it was OOP and more just about piping operators or chaining the term wouldn't fit.
    - alganet 2y ago
      Yes, you totally misunderstood.
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        Yep not sure how I totally misread it here. Looking back they're describing currying. I've used languages and libraries that call it piping, ramda has a .pipe() method for example. Don't think I've ever seen it called pipelining but I see how you could get there.
        alganet 2y ago
        The kid goes to the zoo and sees a tiger. It says: "look, a big cat!" Then the zookeeper angrily beats down the kid while screaming: "You stupid moron, that's a Panthera tigris" His father instead, buys him a book that say "tiger" and has some cool illustrations.

_heimdall 2y ago

Yeah I do think of transducers as a functional paradigm, I read the article as describing a very functional paradigm as well. In the context of a specific programming language feature it seems like terminology would be important, I wasn't trying to nitpick unintentionally.

alganet 2y ago
It is important for the functional guys, and I recognize the importance it has for them. These "pipelines" and "object streaming" APIs are often built upon OOP. I feel that calling it "transducers" would offend the sensibilities of those who think it must be functional all the way down. Don't you think it's better to keep it with a different name? I mean, even among the functional community itself there seems to be a lot of stress around purity, why would anyone want to make it worse?
- _heimdall 2y ago
  I may have just misunderstood the OP. It sounded to me like describing the benefits specifically of transducers, but if it was OOP and more just about piping operators or chaining the term wouldn't fit.
  - alganet 2y ago
    Yes, you totally misunderstood.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Yep not sure how I totally misread it here. Looking back they're describing currying. I've used languages and libraries that call it piping, ramda has a .pipe() method for example. Don't think I've ever seen it called pipelining but I see how you could get there.
      - alganet 2y ago
        The kid goes to the zoo and sees a tiger. It says: "look, a big cat!" Then the zookeeper angrily beats down the kid while screaming: "You stupid moron, that's a Panthera tigris" His father instead, buys him a book that say "tiger" and has some cool illustrations.