Grafting Functional Support on Top of an Imperative Language

[bearophile]

Walter Bright:
> Andrei Alexandrescu's talk just given at ACCU:
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/accu-functional.pdf

The pages of this talk are interesting, and simple enough.

Page 2: >As convenient as a scripting language<

This is a myth/lie. D seems more 'convenient' than C++ and C in some applications, but dynamic languages like Python are probably more 'productive' than D still.


P.6: >Ideal language—allow:<

I'm sure lot of people (like functional programming lovers) don't think that mix as the ideal situation :-)


P.14 >Defining a transitive const<

That's one possible D 2.x, the current one, but it may change. This talk presents such things like they are already finished and set in stone (FP programming in D 2.x too).


P. 31: >writeln(i);<

Can you put (temporary) debugging writeln/putr inside a pure function?


P. 35: >It all rests on an efficient machine model!<

I don't understand :-)

Bye,
bearophile