Tracy R Reed wrote: > James G. Sack (jim) wrote: >> I know very little about functional programming, but I keep getting >> stuck on claims that assume the absence of side effects. Is code that >> has side effects (eg, any i/o) not allowed IN a function by some kind of >> formality? Is side-effects stuff forced into some special code artifact >> that is outside the meaning of _function_ -- or what? > > Yes, side effects are forced into a special code artifact. The key seems > to be keeping the purely functional internals of your program separate > from the messy side effect dependent externals of the program. That way > you can make certain guarantees about how the internals of your program > will work which seems like a win to me. Keeping these worlds separate > seem to be what Haskell uses monads for. >
Ahhh, ok. Then it does make sense to call a function the equivalent of a mathematical function. I guess that's the point ..er ..duh! Regards, ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
