3 ms·
Better at being both a functional and object oriented language?
by Touche 13y ago
Better at being both a functional and object oriented language?
- lucian1900 13y agoBetter than JavaScript anyway, pretty much all of them.
- Touche 13y agoI didn't ask which are "better", I asked which are better at being both functional and object oriented at the same time. I can accept Lua, but the others I really need a good argument for.
- lucian1900 13y agoThey are all better at both than JavaScript. There is no feature that JavaScript has that the other languages don't, often in very similar shapes. The reverse is mostly not true.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> Better at being both a functional and object oriented language? Well that's both subjective and ambiguous (subjective in the evaluation of quality in each area, and ambiguous because the meaning of "better at a and b" can be interpreted in a number of ways, such as max by min(a,b), max by average(a,b), etc. But, given that, I'd say that several of the listed languages are better at "being both a functional and object oriented language" than JavaScript, including Scala and Ruby.
- Touche 13y agoSo where's all the functional Ruby code? I've never seen any.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> So where's all the functional Ruby code? All over. Various functional approaches are basic core Ruby programming techniques. Its not a great FP language because it lacks functional purity (like most Lisps, and, more to the immediate point, like JS) and the main Ruby implementations lack TCO (as, again, do many Lisps and, again, JS.) But there's certainly a lot Ruby code using functional style.