>>7
I can tell by the presence of set! and having seen quite a few functional languages in my time.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 2:28 ID:iaPEYfBD
Erlang is a functional language plus very straightforward non-FP IO to make it useful.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 2:31 ID:iDPiOxnJ
C is a functional language plus very straightforward non-FP IO to make it useful.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 2:44 ID:iaPEYfBD
C is an imperative language plus very brittle IO to make it headache inducing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 2:47 ID:8k83JhdH
sleep = threadDelay . round . (* 10^6)
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 3:21 ID:TC0cZc8j
It's not impossible, it just breaks all the rules
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 4:56 ID:5RGLzFGc
This thread delivers
Pure FP languages are mostly useless. That's why you have mixed FP languages where you can get things done. Choose your flavour and percent of FP purity from Erlang, Scheme, Common Lisp, Ruby, Python, Lua, and who knows what else.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-12 4:58 ID:86H3Hqj7
sleep() is not impossible, just nonsensical. You insist on counting only pure FP (and applied purely, so Haskell + IO() monad is also non-FP by your standards) languages as FP, which by definition makes them not have runtime, and then say "hah, but you can't sleep(), never mind it's inherently specific to runtime! I rawk!".
It's like making a coffee machine that works by synthesising coffee from individual atoms, and then saying that it has one disadvantage, namely that you can't remove lime from it. What you just found is flaw in your reasoning, not flaw in the system.