News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Total Functional Programming (2004) [pdf] by epgui on Thursday March 07, 2024 @08:51AM (#39629035)
> Why is this taken as a given to be a good thing?

It is not taken as a given at all. It is an acknowledgment that it makes perfect sense to build on top of centuries of work and theory on well-behaved tools, rather than reinventing the wheel with ill-behaved tools.

Re:Total Functional Programming (2004) [pdf] by foobarchu on Thursday March 07, 2024 @10:43AM (#39630428)
It's honestly wild to see this even being argued about in 2024. Ten years ago, I remember the discussions around FP being universally "yes of course it's better, but what's the best way to make it practical in the real world where you need side effects".
Re:Total Functional Programming (2004) [pdf] by pjmlp on Thursday March 07, 2024 @11:02AM (#39630661)
There are folks that think they can still reason about code being executed on 128 cores (AMD EPYC™ 9004).
Re:Total Functional Programming (2004) [pdf] by epgui on Thursday March 07, 2024 @12:23PM (#39631657)
I mean it's pretty trivial if you have referential transparency, which is what FP gives you.
Re:Total Functional Programming (2004) [pdf] by pjmlp on Thursday March 07, 2024 @01:19PM (#39632579)
Indeed, that is the point I am making.