On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 01:33, Richard Wiedenhöft <rich...@wiedenhoeft.xyz> wrote: > I am very interested in why you dislike functional-programming paradigms. It's > a lot of complexity for sure but IMHO it makes it easier to reason about > certain complicated problems. There are cases where it's worth the extra > (well-defined) complexity.
'certain complicated problems' says it all. Functional PLs are special purpose. But the functional folks have gone too far in solving general problems with functional programming and then ending up with almost un-maintainable/un-readable code. > Regarding Rust: I actually think that Rust's memory/thread safety features > solve > a lot of problems. In particular most serious security issues in the recent > past > wouldn't have happened if Rust was used. That makes the language at least Why not? Apart from some buffer bounds checking many security problems aren't related to writing into X memory pages. What about a flawed implementation using limited entropy? How would Rust help with the issue of human implementation flaws? Best regards, Anselm
