On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:13:22PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Yet another problem is that design patterns are all about design > and less about coding. Many challenges in functional programming are about > coding, and just about coding.
This is something I've chatted about with a colleague of mine. When one deals with objects and mutable state, one can build models of a system at various levels of abstraction, and meaningfylly relate the models to each other with data refinement. What would be the corresponding notions in functional programming? It is certainly true that functional programs are often much more abstract than their imperative counterparts, but even in my relatively small compiler project I have already felt a need for a compact design notation. Another issue is that when one uses a functional language to design something that is inherently stateful, one would really want to see the state explicitly at some level of abstraction. Would people recommend something like UML for doing this? -- pertti _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
