4 ms·
I will certainly be downvoted for this, but I want to be honest so here it is anyway: In all my programming years, 20+ years that is, I've met hundreds of prog
by axilmar 4y ago
I will certainly be downvoted for this, but I want to be honest so here it is anyway:
In all my programming years, 20+ years that is, I've met hundreds of programmers, and 95%+ of them handled imperative programming languages just fine, with very few actual bugs coming from each one.
Each time there is such a conversation, I have yet to see some actual concrete proof that functional programming provides a substantial increase in productivity over well-implemented imperative code.
In other words, I am still not convinced about the merits of functional programming over imperative programming. I want some real proof, not anecdotal evidence of the type 'we had a mess of code with C++, then we switched to Haskell and our code improved 150%".
Lots and lots of pieces of code that work flawlessly (or almost flawlessly) have been written in plain C, including the operating system that powers most of Earth (I.e. Unix-like operating systems, Windows etc).
So please allow me to be skeptical about the actual amount of advancement functional programming can offer. I just don't see it.
- urthor 4y agoI agree fully. My viewpoint, as a functional programmer, is software is a young field. We don't know much of anything about it. We're living in the first 100 years after the Gutenberg printing press. All I know is NLP code generation will be a dramatic change. Everything else, we are still figuring out.
- ronanyeah 4y agoI think personal experience with multiple paradigms is essential for a developer to decide which one they prefer. The opinions of programmers who have only used one paradigm are less than worthless, since they are demonstrating a basic lack of curiosity and lack of willingness to invest in their craft. You can always find excuses not to learn.