Re^7: How do I go from procedural to object oriented programming?

A function in the mathematical sense is something a little different than a function in the programming sense.

No, it depends on the context:

Under the imperative programming paradigm, "function" can refer to anything: subroutines with and without return values; deterministic and non-deterministic; and with and without side effects.

Under the functional programming paradigm, "function" nowadays usually has the mathematical meaning... well, at least in hardcore functional-programming circles (i.e. between Haskell programmers).

The differentiation between function and procedure a-la Pascal is, frankly, uninteresting and mostly useless.

Comment on Re^7: How do I go from procedural to object oriented programming?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: How do I go from procedural to object oriented programming? by Jenda (Abbot) on Apr 21, 2015 at 14:43 UTC
There is a lot of non-pure functional languages that NEED to be able to distinguish between referentially transparent functions and other functions and they are not going to refer to the later in the artist-formerly-known-as-prince way. Sure, there are languages in which all functions are referentially transparent, but that's a different thing. The pascal style distinction is common and well respected. Jenda Enoch was right! Enjoy the last years of Rome.	[reply]
Re^9: How do I go from procedural to object oriented programming? by einhverfr (Friar) on Apr 21, 2015 at 15:10 UTC
I think the problem is that the mathematical definition of a function (for every x in a domain, there is exactly one value of f(x)) and the ordinary definition (the function of a lawn mower is that it cuts grass). But you are right that functional programming is limited to the former definition. That doesn't mean that function might have a different meaning in an imperative context.	[reply]
Re^9: How do I go from procedural to object oriented programming? by salva (Canon) on Apr 21, 2015 at 15:40 UTC
There is a lot of non-pure functional languages that NEED to be able to distinguish between referentially transparent functions and other functions and they are not going to refer to the later in the artist-formerly-known-as-prince way That makes sense. The pascal style distinction is common and well respected. Really? that's not my experience, but well, it may depend on where you move.	[reply]