Where FP meets OO
christopherhunt-software.blogspot.com
Where FP meets OO
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: Where FP meets OO
#2Interesting article Chris.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#3https://parleys.com/play/51c1994ae4b0d38b54f4621b/chapter33/...
After about 53-th minute Odersky gets lost in side effects in a very simple code.
This is why there's nothing elegant about Scala.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#4"Scala is the only language that I know of that marries the world of FP and OO"
You can do that in C#/F# too. There's nothing special about Scala from this point of view.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#5In CLOS.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#6https://parleys.com/play/51c1994ae4b0d38b54f4621b/chapter33/... After about 53-th minute Odersky gets lost in side effects in a very simple code. This is why there's nothing elegant about Scala.
The OP points out that immutable code is the standard in Scala. You have picked an example where Odersky gets 'lost' in mutable code. If anything, this video (and your comment) makes the case for immutable and side-effect free code using Actors and FP, as apparently it can be confusing.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#7"Scala is the only language that I know of that marries the world of FP and OO" You can do that in C#/F# too. There's nothing special about Scala from this point of view.
C# and F# are different languages..
Last I checked you could not mix the two easily [0]
[0]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14280001/why-cant-we-use-...
Re: Where FP meets OO
#8"Scala is the only language that I know of that marries the world of FP and OO" You can do that in C#/F# too. There's nothing special about Scala from this point of view.
OCaml was doing that before any of them.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#9"Scala is the only language that I know of that marries the world of FP and OO" You can do that in C#/F# too. There's nothing special about Scala from this point of view.
C# and F# are different languages.. Last I checked you could not mix the two easily [0] [0]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14280001/why-cant-we-use-...
I think the poster means that c# has many functional features and F#, while being functional language at heart has lots of OO features integrated in it.
PS And the linked question only describes the limitations of Visual Studio where you can have only one language in a given project.
Re: Where FP meets OO
#10I'm not sure that OO-ness is a desired property.
Alexander Stepanov, original creator of the STL:
"I find OOP technically unsound. It attempts to decompose the world in terms of interfaces that vary on a single type. To deal with the real problems you need multisorted algebras - families of interfaces that span multiple types. I find OOP philosophically unsound. It claims that everything is an object. Even if it is true it is not very interesting - saying that everything is an object is saying nothing at all. I find OOP methodologically wrong. It starts with classes. It is as if mathematicians would start with axioms. You do not start with axioms - you start with proofs. Only when you have found a bunch of related proofs, can you come up with axioms. You end with axioms. The same thing is true in programming: you have to start with interesting algorithms. Only when you understand them well, can you come up with an interface that will let them work."
More discussion:
http://www.quora.com/Was-object-oriented-programming-a-failu...