> On Dec 21, 2017, at 3:06 PM, Don Lapin via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> > wrote: > > 4D does not seem to lend itself to the functional approach.
Completely true. Changing the database is non-functional. You could try to enforce this discipline, but I think it would be difficult to get real work done in 4D. Even if you never passed a pointer or used a process/interprocess variable, a method might have side effects if it changes the database or modifies an object parameter. Error handling in 4D is incredibly primitive compared to other languages and the only way to get error information is via side effects. > > When designing something new, do you give any thought to using one or the > other approach? Do you force yourself to only return values to a calling > method? Or do these paradigms represent a distinction of no practical > significance? I think making every method functional with minimal side effects is a good goal. But I don't think it is possible to write understandable and maintainable 4D code using a purely functional approach. John DeSoi, Ph.D. ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
