3 ms·
> FP is largely defined by what it avoids Why? FP is just a theory of computing, equivalent to all the other existing theories. It allows to do some analysis w
by sklogic 11y ago
> FP is largely defined by what it avoids
Why? FP is just a theory of computing, equivalent to all the other existing theories. It allows to do some analysis which is not that simple with the other theories (and it is crappy with the other important analysis methods, most notoriously with complexity analysis). It does not "add" or "avoid" anything at all.
- babygoat 11y agoBecause many people think of it and define it in terms of how it differs from the paradigm that they're familiar with, and because people often incorporate functional programming concepts into imperative program designs.
- tel 11y agoIt's not actually crappy at all for complexity analysis. Laziness is sometimes spoken about in that way, but nobody is forcing you to be lazy.
- sklogic 11y agoYet, Turing machine is much easier and is almost always a first choice for a complexity research. Of course, it heavily depends on a nature of an algorithm.
- tel 11y agoI'm not confident that it's much easier in any universal sense, but I certainly agree that the nature of at least the presentation of an algorithm defines the easiest way to talk about its analysis.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]