On Monday 05 June 2006 12:08 am, kelsey hudson wrote: > Gabriel Sechan wrote: > > I don't like functional programming. I'm glad it exists, its always > > nice to see a completely different approach (since in reality the OO and > > procedural approaches are pretty damn similar). But it bears absolutely > > no resemblance to my natural thought flow. My mind works procedurally, > > it has since I've been a kid- I've always taken the break things into > > steps, then into smaller steps approach. As such I avoid actually using > > them like the plague. I'll pay the price of having to do my own locking > > gladly, it would still be 10x more efficient for me in terms of > > programmer hours. > > My thoughts *exactly* -- I don't think i could do a better job > explaining that if I tried. :) > > -Kelsey
Guys, the process of breaking a big problem down into smaller problems and then solving the small ones first is nothing more than the classic Top Down Design, Bottom Up Implementation. As an approach it is far older than programming. I suspect it goes back to the first engineers well before the pyramids. Nothing in functional programming stands in the way of using this approach. Forth has many elements of functional programming about it. I have built many Forth programs using TDDBUI that passed unnamed parameters on a stack and had practically no side effects. BobLQ -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
