Re: The importance and relevance of FP

[Manuel M. T. Chakravarty]

Ketil Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,

> Friedrich Dominicus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Could you explain why Lisp isn't a FP language?
> 
> Well, the obvious arguments would be that
> 
> : functions, while pretty first class objects, reside in their own
> namespace, and need special operators.
> : iteration and side effects are not particularly discouraged, and is
> probably as common as recursion and purity in actual code.

May I politely refer to the FP FAQ:

  http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/faq.html#functional-languages

I guess that there are heaps of people on this list who have
heard this type of discussion already a million times and
are a bit wary of it.

Thank you,
Manuel