The latest exchange between Bill Lam and Raul Miller definitely fits
what I was asking originally.

I am aware that we can look at the differences between J and most
languages that are called "functional programming" languages, then
conclude that J is therefore not "a functional programming language."
I'm also aware of the differentiation John Backus emphasized, and that
J could be set into a different category out of those considerations.

However, when I look at the most important qualities of "functional
programming", and the sort of programming that is routinely identified
as the alternative, it looks to me that J is among the very best
functional programming languages. Given that there is a great deal of
interest in "functional programming" at the moment, it seems to me
counterproductive to not give good attention to the ways in which J
excels at providing what people are looking for when they turn toward
functional programming.

Since people tend to imagine that things such as tail recursion
optimization (and the things Bill listed) are vital to FP, I propose
that we will be better off if we can explain how these things are but
one collection of means, not ends.

Tracy



On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:59 PM, bill lam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I would say 'J is not a language for serious functional programming'
>> since J lacks all features that present in modern fp such as lazy
>> evaluation, infinite list, abstract type, functional compositions
>> other than adverb/conjunction and fork/hook.
>
> And I suppose I would say that "serious functional programming"
> seems to have been rooted in misunderstanding.  See notes
> relating to Backus at:
>
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function-level_programming
>
> But even from this point of view, I do not think "functional
> compositions other than adverb/conjunction and fork/hook"
> counts as a feature.
>
> --
> Raul
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to