edifice

6 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   It's not just me then.
2. 2.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   Scala effectively has these kinds of type declarations on every function. This article itself proves the point. Take out the :static and type decls and see.
3. 3.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   It definitely depends on the algorithm. It also depends on the language. A lot of the difficulty of learning Haskell, for example, is in the type system. A dynamically typed FP lang like Clojure has a shallower learning curve.
4. 4.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   You're still going to find Scala to be significantly faster on arbitrary code. It's great that there are ways to speed up key functions in Clojure now though.
5. 5.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   Good question. My opinion is that thinking in terms of recursive transformations of immutable datastructures is just fundamentally more difficult than the imperative equivalents. My earliest exposure to recursive algorithms was in AP comput
6. 6.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   That's true. Scala can be pretty fast but it needs a lot of ram. Thanks for taking the time to write this up. Detailed descriptions of real-world applications of FP languages are always welcome.
7. 7.▲
   by edifice 16y ago

   Good article. Mirrors my own experience in three ways: 1. Immutable datastructures make it a lot easier to reason about data flow and to write correct code. 2. Static typing helps write cleaner, more explicit APIs. 3. Programming effectivel