The Downfall of Imperative Programming

[James Miller]

* bearophile <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> [2012-04-12 15:14:37 +0200]:

> James Miller:
> 
> >I wish I could love Haskell, and for pure computer science, it's
> >fine, amazing even, but for real-world programming,
> >it just doesn't cut it.
> 
> Haskell contains some ideas worth copying even in non-functional
> languages (or in mixed languages as D).
> 
> Enforced purity and immutability, lazy immutable lists, pattern
> matching, tuples and their various unpacking syntax, list
> comprehension, structural algebraic types, built-in currying and
> partial application, and so on, are handy and allow to express
> certain computing idioms in a succinct and clear way (and not every
> part of a program needs the same runtime efficiency). Scala language
> shows that you can put several of those things in a language that
> supports mutability too.
> 
> Bye,
> bearophile

I like Scala, didn't really get it when I first looked at it, but that
was a while ago, and I have learned Haskell since then, so I might give
it another look. As I said, Haskell is a fine language, and the features
are very useful.

My favorites are: partial function application, currying, list
comprehension and lazy lists. There are others, but these are things
that I miss the most from my time using Haskell

--
James Miller