>>1
Judging from >>4 , I'd say Haskell is clearly simpler. Are you trying to make some sort of statement? Speak your mind.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-17 10:32 ID:dducprHi
Only novice programmers care about their programs' output. Satori programmers don't even write their programs down, they don't even have to think about the programs -- they already know the answer.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-17 13:55 ID:2n0j+IS/
No program can be truly functional, because time passes destructively and irreversibly as it runs.
>>6
print 3 is not a valid answer. Only 5 bothered trying to give a real answer.
Well the printing is a side effect. The return of print is an arbitrary value, the IO occurred externally. Which is silly because if you rely on laziness you need to know when the side effects of IO are required or not.
>>14
Lisp is like most languages that borrow from it (Python, Ruby, JavaScript, Lua): a bit of everything, so you can use the right tool for the right job at the right time.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-17 23:29 ID:djIfg4hV
>>13 >>14
it's one of the oldest, if not the oldest, language that supports functional programming. not pure, but still. it supports it.
Programs that do I/O aren't purely functional. But programs that don't do I/O are boring and pointless. Therefore it's better to specify I/O in a manner that preserves referential transparency and obeys most of the conventions of the functional language underneath. Hence the IO monad in Haskell.
That good enough? No? Then go suck on some "uniqueness types" in Clean. Hint: they don't do parser monads in Clean.
Yet the computer is not a functional device and you're adding unnecessary semantics for the sake of a methodology which doesn't even help you finish programs!
Name:
herc2007-08-20 16:32 ID:ZE+6eXHy
there are chips optimized for functional programming ( haskell, if i remember right) . those chips might be fast enough
Yet the problems we want to solve with computers are many times not imperative. Fuck if the CPU isn't functional; it's a better layer to work with.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-20 19:33 ID:i+RACIuI
>Fuck if the CPU isn't functional; it's a better layer to work with.
Well, then your solution will be so slow that you might as well not use a computer to solve it. </thread></forum></internet></known-universe></entirety-of-all-existences></essence-of-matter-space-energy>