On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 00:56:24 UTC, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:57:33 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Saturday, 14 March 2015 at 23:46:28 UTC, Ellery Newcomer
wrote:
And C# has LINQ, which when combined with the last point is
fricken awesome.
what does LINQ offer that UFCS-style functional programming
does not?
LINQ basically is a UFCS-style api. AST reflection is what
makes it nice.
consider:
X.Where(x => x.Members.Count() == x.Admins.Count())
straightforward in both D and C# when X is an array or
container type.
When X is a table in a database, things get tricky for D.
C# can interpret the lambda as an Expression<Func> (an AST
type), so the implementation of X can reflect over the body of
the lambda and use it to generate the appropriate SQL. ORMs
such as entity framework and nhibernate do this now.
Even if we can't get the lambdas as syntax tress, the fact that
we can send whatever types we want to the delegates and overload
operators and stuff means we can still convert the lambdas into
SQL.
Here is a very crude, very basic example:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/94d851d7ca63. An enterprise implementation
will be much bigger and much more complicated - but so is the C#
implementation.
At any rate, I really don't like what C# did with LINQ-to-SQL.
The whole special-syntax to functional-style to syntax-tree to
SQL is too overcomplicated - a simply lisp-style macro
system(like what they have in Scala or Rust) could have done the
trick in a simpler and faster way.
