Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   C++ (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f39-c.html)
-   -   Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup? (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t958661-re-oo-vs-functional-programming-whats-a-suitable-newsgroup.html)

Tiib 03-14-2013 11:56 AM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Thursday, 14 March 2013 13:19:25 UTC+2, Andy Champ wrote:
> I came across this in a job advert: "Experience of both functional and
> Object Oriented design and engineering is essential as the product is
> evolving from following a functional to an OO design discipline". I was
> a bit surprised at this - I know little of functional programming (in
> the Erlang/Haskell etc sense, which I assume is what they mean) but I'd
> thought it was a newer paradigm.


It is very old paradigm, Lisp is over 60 years old language.

In C++ there is some support std::bind, std::function and most importantly
the lambdas. It is still hard to be purely functional with C++.

> This as a discussion doesn't really belong here - can anyone suggest a
> suitable newsgroup? I did look at comp.programming, but it doesn't look
> healthy.


Healthy? then maybe comp.lang.lisp. they are heathy always.

Nobody 03-15-2013 12:29 AM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 04:56:35 -0700, Öö Tiib wrote:

> In C++ there is some support std::bind, std::function and most importantly
> the lambdas. It is still hard to be purely functional with C++.


OTOH, template metaprogramming is purely functional.


Tiib 03-15-2013 01:37 AM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Friday, 15 March 2013 02:29:04 UTC+2, Nobody wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 04:56:35 -0700, Tiib wrote:
> > In C++ there is some support std::bind, std::function and most importantly
> > the lambdas. It is still hard to be purely functional with C++.

>
> OTOH, template metaprogramming is purely functional.


I agree but ...
1) It was discovered not designed feature of language.
2) The C++ compilers are inefficient language interpreters.
3) A code generator written in Haskell or Lisp is far more readable.

So it is interesting toy but should not be pushed too seriously.

Nobody 03-15-2013 06:13 PM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:37:25 -0700, Öö Tiib wrote:

>> OTOH, template metaprogramming is purely functional.

>
> I agree but ...
> 1) It was discovered not designed feature of language.
> 2) The C++ compilers are inefficient language interpreters.
> 3) A code generator written in Haskell or Lisp is far more readable.
>
> So it is interesting toy but should not be pushed too seriously.


C++11 eliminates some of the need for it by providing "constexpr"
functions. But those also require the use of functional idioms for
non-trivial cases (e.g. a constexpr function can return an expression
which involves a recursive call, but it can't use a "for" loop).


88888 Dihedral 03-15-2013 08:13 PM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
Nobody於 2013年3月16日星期*UTC+8上午2時13分50秒 寫道:
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:37:25 -0700, Öö Tiib wrote:
>
>
>
> >> OTOH, template metaprogramming is purely functional.

>
> >

>
> > I agree but ...

>
> > 1) It was discovered not designed feature of language.

>
> > 2) The C++ compilers are inefficient language interpreters.

>
> > 3) A code generator written in Haskell or Lisp is far more readable.

>
> >

>
> > So it is interesting toy but should not be pushed too seriously.

>
>
>
> C++11 eliminates some of the need for it by providing "constexpr"
>
> functions. But those also require the use of functional idioms for
>
> non-trivial cases (e.g. a constexpr function can return an expression
>
> which involves a recursive call, but it can't use a "for" loop).


Just embed a high level interpreter which could link available
pre-compiled libraies such as DLLs to accept new classes and new objects
in the run-time is simple.

Geoff 03-15-2013 09:55 PM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 21:14:52 +0000, Andy Champ <no.way@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>On 15/03/2013 20:13, 88888 Dihedral wrote:
>> Just embed a high level interpreter which could link available
>> pre-compiled libraies such as DLLs to accept new classes and new objects
>> in the run-time is simple.

>
>Is this guy on acid, or is it just a failed AI program?
>
>Andy


Nobody knows. It doesn't pass the Turing test.

88888 Dihedral 03-17-2013 09:20 AM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
Andy Champ於 2013年3月16日星期*UTC+8上午5時14分52秒 寫道:
> On 15/03/2013 20:13, 88888 Dihedral wrote:
>
> > Just embed a high level interpreter which could link available

>
> > pre-compiled libraies such as DLLs to accept new classes and new objects

>
> > in the run-time is simple.

>
>
>
> Is this guy on acid, or is it just a failed AI program?
>
>
>
> Andy


Do you think that marching toward the AI target is not advancing
in this century?

Nick Keighley 03-17-2013 10:51 AM

Re: OO vs functional programming: what's a suitable newsgroup?
 
On Mar 17, 9:20*am, 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88...@googlemail.com>
wrote:
> Andy Champ於 2013年3月16日星期*UTC+8上午5時14分52秒 寫道:
>
> > On 15/03/2013 20:13, 88888 Dihedral wrote:

>
> > > Just embed a high level interpreter which could link available

>
> > > pre-compiled libraies such as DLLs to accept new classes and new objects

>
> > > in the run-time is simple.

>
> > Is this guy on acid, or is it just a failed AI program?

>
> > Andy

>
> Do you think that marching toward the AI target is not advancing
> in this century?


say again. this time in english


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.