On May 31, 12:36 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > But even if only a minority of programmers can master languages like > Lisp, Haskell, or Scheme, doesn't mean that *all* programmers can't learn > something from them. Functional programming is at least 50% a philosophy: > > * pass arguments to functions, and return results, rather than getting > and setting state from a variable.
Yes that's the sense in which I am using the term. More such ideas of FP that can be used by all sorts of programmers across the board (not just FPers) is here: http://blog.languager.org/2012/10/functional-programming-lost-booty.html > On Thu, 30 May 2013 10:12:22 -0700, rusi wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Ma Xiaojun <damage3...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> Wait a minute! Isn't the most nature way of doing/thinking "generating > >> 9x9 multiplication table" two nested loop? > > > Thats like saying that the most natur(al) way of using a car is to > > attach a horse to it. > >[...] > > Likewise in the world of programming, 90% of programmers think > > imperative/OO programming is natural while functional programming is > > strange. Just wait 10 years and see if things are not drastically > > different! > > It won't be. Functional programming goes back to Lisp, which is nearly as > old as Fortran and older than Cobol. There have been many decades for > functional languages to become mainstream, but they've never quite done > it. There's no reason to think that the next decade will see a change to > this. Depends on how you define your terms. Comprehensions and lambdas have come into python. From where? [Lambdas have even got into C++ !!] Also LINQ in C# is inspired by comprehensions Generics were not there in C# and Java early editions. Now they've been retrofitted -- Origin SML. Almost every modern language supports garbage collection. Origin Lisp Numpy is a rip-off of APL. [Ripping off is a tribute. Non- acknowledgement is sad...] TAOCP -Vol 1 is a gigantic exercise on how to do lisp without lisp. Also called Greenspun's 10th law: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GreenspunsTenthRuleOfProgramming > Some modern Functional languages are really neat, like Haskell, but I > think the sad truth is that to really master them (and not just make do > with a small percentage of their functionality) is beyond 90% of > programmers. I'm not ashamed to admit that I struggle with advanced FP > concepts. Yes Haskell is HARD. Gets harder with each new major addition. Which is why I suggest using Haskell core (ie minus most fancy features) as an *ideology* rather than as a *technology*. Which is what I am suggesting in my course proposal https://moocfellowship.org/submissions/the-dance-of-functional-programming-languaging-with-haskell-and-python "Think with Haskell --- Code into Python" Want to contribute <wink>? Well actually the last applies to anyone who is interested -- suggestions welcome!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
