Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
1–10 of 417 posts
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#2JavaScript isn't a functional language itself, but you can use a functional library like lodash/fp (https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide) on top of it to get all that lovely functional goodness in your frontend and node code. Using lodash/fp has made my frontend state management code a lot nicer, and I'm really only just starting out with it.
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#3JavaScript isn't a functional language itself, but you can use a functional library like lodash/fp ( https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide ) on top of it to get all that lovely functional goodness in your frontend and node code. Using lodash/fp has made my frontend state management code a lot nicer, and I'm really only just starting out with it.
The video explains how JavaScript started out as a Scheme-dialect (Lisp) but for marketing reasons they chose a more Java-like syntax and adopted Java into the name.
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#4JavaScript isn't a functional language itself, but you can use a functional library like lodash/fp ( https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide ) on top of it to get all that lovely functional goodness in your frontend and node code. Using lodash/fp has made my frontend state management code a lot nicer, and I'm really only just starting out with it.
The video explains how JavaScript started out as a Scheme-dialect (Lisp) but for marketing reasons they chose a more Java-like syntax and adopted Java into the name.
An historical mistake that humanity is paying (and will pay) for a long time.
Scheme 'cloths' was a viable option. Lisp remains the most popular scripting language among Autocad users despite Autodesk pushing other languages (.NET and JS). So popular that Autocad clones use it also as a scripting language[1].
Edited [1] https://www.zwsoft.com/zwcad/features#Dynamic-Block
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#5JavaScript isn't a functional language itself, but you can use a functional library like lodash/fp ( https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide ) on top of it to get all that lovely functional goodness in your frontend and node code. Using lodash/fp has made my frontend state management code a lot nicer, and I'm really only just starting out with it.
You may want to consider Ramda.js instead:
https://ramdajs.com/
IMHO does a better job than Lodash, because:
1. All functions are automatically curried.
2. The order of parameters lends itself to composition.
EDIT: 3. Transducers.
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#6Richard Gabriel’s famous essay “Worse is better” (https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html) is an interesting perspective on why Lisp lost to C. In a way, the same arguments (simplicity vs consistency vs correctness vs completeness) can be made for why functional programming lost to OOP.
But those philosophical perspectives aside, personally I find my brain works very much like a Turing Machine, when dealing with complex problems. Apart from my code, even most of my todos are simple step-by-step instructions to achieve something. It’s easily understandable why like me, other non-math folks would prefer a Turing Machine over Lambda Calculus’ way of writing instructions.
This could be why OOP/Imperative was often preferred over FP.
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
The video explains how JavaScript started out as a Scheme-dialect (Lisp) but for marketing reasons they chose a more Java-like syntax and adopted Java into the name.
An historical mistake that humanity is paying (and will pay) for a long time. Scheme 'cloths' was a viable option. Lisp remains the most popular scripting language among Autocad users despite Autodesk pushing other languages (.NET and JS). So popular that Autocad clones use it also as a scripting language[1]. Edited [1] https://www.zwsoft.com/zwcad/features#Dynamic-Block
I was working for bigest Autocad competitor for more than 10 years and never had to touch anything similar to lisp :)
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#8JavaScript isn't a functional language itself, but you can use a functional library like lodash/fp ( https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide ) on top of it to get all that lovely functional goodness in your frontend and node code. Using lodash/fp has made my frontend state management code a lot nicer, and I'm really only just starting out with it.
You may want to consider Ramda.js instead: https://ramdajs.com/ IMHO does a better job than Lodash, because: 1. All functions are automatically curried. 2. The order of parameters lends itself to composition. EDIT: 3. Transducers.
3. transducers
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#9Maybe Elm itself is a killer app, but certainly not elm-ui. I don't think Datomic is a killer app too. Its certainly not comparable to Rails/OSes at scale
Re: Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? [video]
#10Richard Gabriel’s famous essay “Worse is better” ( https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html ) is an interesting perspective on why Lisp lost to C. In a way, the same arguments (simplicity vs consistency vs correctness vs completeness) can be made for why functional programming lost to OOP. But those philosophical perspectives aside, personally I find my brain works very much like a Turing Machine, when dealing wi…
Personally my thinking changes from Turing Machine to more math like with each year I do functional programming