Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Functional programming not more productive

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 7:58

Functional programming is not be more productive than imperative programming.

Besides the fact in practical cases, you can hardly do a real application in pure functional programming and how it sometimes complicates things by making you think things in a twisted way, there's a problem with functional programming:

Every time I write something that's actually much faster than having written the same thing in an imperative paradigm, I spend all the time I saved fapping to it.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 9:50

k

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 10:17

>>1
Yeah, I'll bet you also used to have issues with premature ejaculation.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 18:31 (sage)

I'm glad you provided evidence.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 18:52

i dont know what all this means

all i know is.. lisp > java

Name: Chingon 2006-05-10 18:53

Procedural Programming you mean?

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 19:01

>>6

No. I think he is talking about stuff like prolog

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 19:40

Prolog sucks balls.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 19:49

>>8
HASKELL SUPERIOR

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 20:02

>>9

ugh

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 21:31

>>7
no, prolog is a logical language. functional is stuff like Lisp and ML. they're almost impossible to program in.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-10 22:44

they're almost impossible to program in.

Depends what you're trying to do.

And your familiarity.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-11 0:34

Depends if you're a fucking retard or not.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-11 3:29

>>11
Lisp (and I assume you  mean Common Lisp, as most people do when they say Lisp) is not a functional language; it merely provides function programming for those who want to use it, along with OOP, imperative (granted imperative Lisp looks uglier than Satan's large intestine) declarative and anything other style you can define in a screenful of macros.

Scheme is closer to being a functional language.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-11 3:30

Depends if you like mental wankery and doing things unusual ways or not.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-11 5:53

Depends if you have a PhD in mathematics or not.

Haskell is superior.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 9:53

I like Ruby.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 11:57

>>17
+1

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 15:02

Ruby and Perl and Python (to a lesser extent) are functional languages.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 20:34

my ass is functional too

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 21:00

>>20
COCK GOES WHERE?

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 21:08

>>19
You need to go do some readin' up, bub. Nice they may be, from a wankerial point of view, but functional? No, not in a lifetime.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 21:27

>>1
the "twisted way" is the "mathematical way", which is why it's a thousand times easier to write mathematical stuff with functional languages.

what's a real application? it doesn't make any sense at all, it could be AI, image processing, networking, DBs...

my conclusion is: you suck and you don't know what you're talking about.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 22:12

>>22

You've never programmed in a functional in your life.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-12 22:44

THIS POST IS ABOUT BASKETBALL.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-13 7:12

JavaScript is a functional language. An awesome functional language at that.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-13 8:00

all languages are functional if you try hard enough

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-13 16:50

>>27
Does this include Visual Basic?

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-13 20:20

>>26
no real recursion, it's useless then for functionnal stuff like matrices.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-13 20:56

>>23
Is correct.  If you wish to write a program to show a complex logical implication or numerical calculation then it can be much easier translating those mathematical formulae from symbols on a piece of paper to program using a functional then a imperative language.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 1:48

My grandfather made BASIC functional, they said it was impossible to write what he did in anything besides FORTRAN, but he whipped out his 1337x0r-cox0r and did it, because he knew BASIC and not FORTRAN.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 6:36

I made Bash functional

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 7:08

>>30
But Sun tells me Java can do everything and we only need one language EVAR!!!!!!

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 17:53

>>33
Yep, Ruby.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 20:15

>>34

Ruby can't do image processing, GUIs or games.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 20:25

>>35
RMagick
Any GUI toolkit.
All libraries used for games.

Sprinkle liberally with XML.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-14 23:33

>>36
You don't understand what image processing is.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 1:01

>>35
>>Ruby programmers can't do image processing, GUIs or games.

fixed

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 3:00

FREEBASIC GOSUB/RETURN OR GTFO

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 6:29

>>37
TELL ME OR GET THE FO

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 8:56

>>38
just write an interface to your image processing functions, it's very easy in Ruby, Ruby's overhead is very small if you only call a few functions.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 9:36

RPG Maker 2003 is the best programming tool. Ever.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 11:02

>>34
Sun tells me Ruby is big and evil, always looking to steal their piles of money under their pillows away!

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 12:44

>>41
AKA if you don't do a lot of real work.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-15 20:40 (sage)

>>42
No, it is Rpg Maker XP, because you can use RUBY with it.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-17 14:40

>>45
is right.

>>42
XP > 2k > 2k3. 2k3 is half-baken shit.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-19 1:47

>>45 Yes, but I don't know any way to import my 2000 and 2003 games into it, and besides I've RPGmaker'd enough for a whole lifetime.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-22 9:09

>>24
Oh shut up before I slap you around with a monad combinator, or make your ass an instance of Functor.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-22 10:53

>>48
I'll just undef() you.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-22 19:27

>>49
Can't, I'm immutable.

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-23 6:38

>>50
your immutable is no match for my const_cast

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-23 7:22 (sage)

stfu

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-23 10:56

>>51
Your const_cast only works with pointer types! You stumble!

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-23 14:29

const_cast<void*>(&>>53)=NULL;OH SHI-

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-23 14:31

>>54
should be
*const_cast<void*>(&>>53)=NULL;

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-24 22:21

void *p = 0;
*p = 42;

Name: Anonymous 2006-05-28 16:34

>>35
GTK
GLEXT
OPENGL
and... it's portable in a snap!

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-23 16:42

>>57
enjoy ur disgusting api's

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-23 17:38

52  Name: Anonymous : 2006-05-23 07:22  (sage)
(sage) ?  what happened here?

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-23 18:01

>>59
hmm

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-23 19:29

>>59
man 3 time

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-27 13:59

abcdefghi

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-27 14:00

abcdefghijklmno

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-27 14:02

oooo

Name: Anonymous 2009-12-27 14:02

oooooooooo

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-07 6:41

Hi, I can spam /prog/ too, you faggot.

Also, smoke weed everyday.

Name: Anonymous 2012-03-28 2:21

my farts burn my anus
it hurts
in a good way

Name: Sgt.Kabu⵵ꏜkimanꮠ 2012-05-28 18:53

Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List