Functional Programming Considered Dangerous

I am the phantom autist

I am the phantom autist

I am the phantom autist

I am the phantom autist

I am the phantom autist

I am the phantom autist

>>40
DO YOU WANT A SIDE EFFECT?

This doesn't match with the rest of the post.

>>51
You gotta thank the phantom autist for that.

>>51
yhbt

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

check'em

>>29
Yes, well, C is much slower than assembly.

>>56
Now necessarily, you can write slow code in any language, even assembly. See that thread with Cudder's "don't even think about using an array" challenge, I posted an asm program that did something like 11 syscalls for every byte read from the input file.

Terrific ‚^⎠

anything that abstracts over the von neumann arch too much or any other hardware you are using ultimately sucks. At best you'll end up with something like SQL where two grouped queries can join on at most one row per query. And if you'd want to do the same thing over two rows you could still do it but first you'd have to ensure the uniqueness of rows then count them on both sides. That's functional BS that ends up in a dead end sooner than you wanna know. Dangerous because you wouldn't even be able to figure it out and lose your shitty job trying to... Shitty because you would love to have C in this case, because you could just fuck the problem in the arse with C and at worst it would be a problem to get the relevant data in core memory then it would be a question of performance (basic shit like picking a search algorithm or one of many balanced trees).

This Thread Considered Unscientific and Ultimately Destructive

Ultimately Destructive
echo "Heat 'em up" >/dev/thermite

>>61
this made me lol out loud

>>62
my sides lel'd into the reddit meme moons

>>63
fuck off, sperglord.