Luis M. González <luis...@gmail.com> writes: > That doesn't mean python can compete with other purely functional > languages, but it's probably as functional as it can be for a more > conventional, multiparadigm language.
Ben Lippmeier made the interesting claim that one of the defining characteristics of functional programming is type systems based on the Curry-Howard correspondence. By that standard I think even Scheme (perhaps the grandaddy of functional languages) wouldn't qualify. I do think of Scheme as a functional language, but of Python and Lisp as imperative languages with functional aspects. I like learnyouahaskell.com if you want to get some exposure to Haskell, probably the archetypal functional language these days. I've been fooling with it on and off for the past couple years. I'm still not convinced that it's that good a vehicle for practical general purpose software development, but there are some specific areas where it works out just beautifully. And in terms of the challenges it presents and the amount I've learned from it, it's one of the most interesting things I've done as a programmer in as long as I can remember. It really is mind altering. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list