3 ms·
So, basically, with lots of work, you can make something that's technically functional but with none of the beauty of a language that's meant for it. I underst
by GeneralMayhem 13y ago
So, basically, with lots of work, you can make something that's technically functional but with none of the beauty of a language that's meant for it.
I understand the appeal of functional programming, really I do, but why can't we accept that sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should?