Live data from Hacker News

Functional Programming Is Hard, That's Why It's Good

dave.fayr.am

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: Functional Programming Is Hard, That's Why It's Good

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I've learned something today! When some people talk about functional programming, they talk about monads and iterating with recursion and lambda calculus. Other people talking about functional programming mean using data-oriented abstractions, where functions operate on data in well-defined ways, to avoid state and interlocked dependencies[3]. I've been calling the latter a "functional style", but clearly t…

functional in the small and OO in the large" seems a good path. That's what I like about Erlang as well. Once you recognize processes as your objects, this philosophy just flows out of the language.

[deleted]

Re: Functional Programming Is Hard, That's Why It's Good

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I've learned something today! When some people talk about functional programming, they talk about monads and iterating with recursion and lambda calculus. Other people talking about functional programming mean using data-oriented abstractions, where functions operate on data in well-defined ways, to avoid state and interlocked dependencies[3]. I've been calling the latter a "functional style", but clearly t…

functional in the small and OO in the large" seems a good path. That's what I like about Erlang as well. Once you recognize processes as your objects, this philosophy just flows out of the language.

But is taking a while for Erlang to come to terms with it...see Joe Armstrong "Why OO sucks" (http://www.sics.se/~joe/bluetail/vol1/v1_oo.html)
Post reply on HN