4 ms·
I seem to be describing Haskell because Haskell is the epitome of an FP language. If FP is truly a self-contained practical, versatile paradigm by itself, then
by denim_chicken 12y ago
I seem to be describing Haskell because Haskell is the epitome of an FP language. If FP is truly a self-contained practical, versatile paradigm by itself, then Haskell would exemplify this.
- mercurial 12y agoThere is no "true" definition of functional programming. You can, of course, make the argument that Haskell is the one true functional language, but this is not what is generally accepted (eg, OCaml or Erlang are usually considered functional languages - and most of these languages have strict semantics).
- denim_chicken 12y agoAll I'm saying is that if we plot languages on a spectrum, where one end corresponds to functional programming and the other to, say, imperative programming, then Haskell will be most closely to the FP end than any other practical language. Haskell embodies the most of the tenets of FP.