Anonymous user
Talk:Fusc sequence: Difference between revisions
→Deletion vs variation: On that paper...
(→Deletion vs variation: On that paper...) |
|||
Line 32:
:::: '''Readability''' varies with programming cultures. The procedural versions are there for those accustomed to threading through state changes, and the functional versions serve those familiar with immutability and functional composition, folds and maps.
:::: '''Haskell''' you will need, at some point, to learn how to spell :-) As for the language – it's essentially just math, which underlies all computations. Working with (rather than against) the math makes functional compositions much more likely to resemble each other across different idioms than the rather unconstrained complexities of the procedural state machines with which you do feel more at home, but which contribute, alas, to Python's unusually high bug rate (Davis 2014). [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 12:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
::::ps the paper you quote has its those questioning both its methodology and conclusions, as well as an industry that here's the hype and responds with less blind faith than they did for Lisp and OO before it. Python has a functional style that isn't what you push. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 16:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
| |||