in reply to Re^7: Is it worth using Monads in Perl ? and what the Monads are ?
in thread Is it worth using Monads in Perl ? and what the Monads are ?
I'm still a little bit confused. Is someone trying to "convert" to the Haskell religion? Certainly I hope you don't think I am. Who cares how many people can transition from imperative to functional programming? Go with what works for you. I'm quite content that you at least tried something new, even if it didn't work out for you. In my previous postings, I was trying to get across the idea that there's no one-size-fits-all when it comes to programming languages. My personal experience has been that Haskell lets me write easier to understand programs with less fuss and fewer bugs. Other people have had similar experiences. YMMV.How many of the worlds programmers would successfully make the transition from imperative to functional programming?
- It's the claim...
- It's the claim...
- It's the claim...
for those parts of Haskell programs that are purely functionalEr, *All* Haskell programs are 100% referentially transparent and purely functional. You can substitute equals for equals anywhere and everywhere. Always. No Exceptions. Anyway, I also meant to link to the Q Lanugage in my previous post. Good luck and best wishes.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^9: Is it worth using Monads in Perl ? and what the Monads are ?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jun 17, 2007 at 06:03 UTC | |
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 21, 2007 at 01:37 UTC |