I should mention that both functional programming in general
and Backus's FP _have_ been influenced by APL, which, while
imperative, strongly encourages algebraic combination of
small functions and had (a fixed set of) higher-order operators.
As for Brute Force Learning by reading imperative
It's Backus, people. He was never the god of wine.
I cannot detect any trace of Backus's FP in Haskell at all.
FP is strict. Haskell is not.
FP is typeless. Haskell is highly typeful.
FP does not name formal parameters. Haskell often does.
FP has roots in APL. Haskell doesn't.
I don't see
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe o...@cs.otago.ac.nzwrote:
It's Backus, people. He was never the god of wine.
I cannot detect any trace of Backus's FP in Haskell at all.
FP is strict. Haskell is not.
FP is typeless. Haskell is highly typeful.
FP does not name formal
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Rustom Mody rustompm...@gmail.com wrote:
- in 1992 it was gofer, the predecessor of haskell
- in 2001 it was scheme.
Sorry typo: 2001 it was python
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
When I said I stare at a particular section of the code for a while, I
meant it as an idiom for deeply studying that particular code alone. It's
just me and the code and whatever debugging tools I have readily
available.
Are you familiar with the difficulty in maintaining legacy platforms
This thought isn't really related to Haskell specifically but it's more
towards FP ideal in general.
I'm new to the FP world and to get me started, I began reading a few
papers. One paper is by John Backus called Can Programming Be Liberated
from the von Neumann Style? A Functional Style and
I made an error. I meant FP to stand for Functional Programming, the
concept not the language.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:54 PM, OWP owpmail...@gmail.com wrote:
This thought isn't really related to Haskell specifically but it's more
towards FP ideal in general.
I'm new to the FP world and to
Reading papers might not be the best way to get started with Haskell. It'll
be a great way to expand your knowledge later, but they're generally not
written to give the reader an introduction to functional programming.
I highly recommend Learn You A Haskell [1]. It is extremely well written.
On 13-03-20 06:54 PM, OWP wrote:
For me personally, one thing I enjoy about a typical procedural program
is that it allows me to Brute Force Learn.
[...]
1. I believe that you can also stare at functional programs and figure
out as much as what you can with procedural programs.
It only
