Re: named array
- Posted by TheresNoTime Sep 03, 2013
- 2189 views
I understand the term 'side effect' in relationship to functional programming and I know what 'pure' functions are. Euphoria is a Procedural Language so if you need to use a Functional Language, you would be better off with Erlang, Haskell, F#, Lisp, OCaml, etc.
I love Euphoria. It is very easy and convenient. All of these languages have too little of procedural for my taste. However, I'm interested in other languages, because it broadens the mind. If I had not watched a few video lectures on Ruby and Erlang, I would not be able to solve my problem on Euphoria.
It's no good complaining about impurity while using a procedural language paradigm.
You are not quite right. It is possible to program procedurally in a functional language, it is possible to program functionally in a procedural language. For example, I was doing something similar to the memoization on Euphoria. Choice of language - is the choice of balance. If I can easily realize code, that I need often, I can not accept the fact that some of the rarely required capabilities are implemented difficult (wraps, crutches, external libraries).
Have you heard about the law of 80-10-10? If I am satisfied with 80, the foolish go to another language, because it has 10. Yes, it does have the 10, but it has its own 80, which are unusual to me. If I need the first 10, I think of a crutch. If I need a second 10, then I'll use C++ via the wrapper.
On the other hand, you can write pure functions in Euphoria, including map-like structures, but the work involved would probably be counter-productive.
I hope, Euphoria withstand this load. My program is not very complicated and does not handle huge amounts of data. In addition, they occasionally (quite often) become unnecessary and should be eaten up by the garbage collector.
