@abnv @haskman

As a recovering Scala developer, I fully agree ๐Ÿคฃ

@abnv @haskman why is Rust listed as a functional programming language?
@kosmikus @abnv I like to call Rust an honorary functional programming language. Specifically because its strong static types, immutable variables by default, and tracked mutability, makes it familiar for Haskellers
@abnv @haskman anyone care to explain the specific choice of class alignment for these?
@feld @abnv no.. on the original post I had added a caption of "not taking questions at this time" for a reason ๐Ÿ˜„
@haskman @abnv no, was genuinely curious if there were behaviors or features that might make sense in this context ๐Ÿ™ƒ

@feld @abnv Okay, let me try to explain my thinking a bit -

A caveat - if I were to make this chart today, I would swap the positions of Erlang and Rust.

Keeping that in mind, I made this chart so that each axis broadly makes sense. Lawful languages tend to stick to rules and the only surprises are usually how much of a stickler for rules they are. Chaotic languages on the other hand, love their quirks / special cases. "Good" languages are usually languages with academic backgrounds, whereas "Evil" languages sacrifice some ideals for practicality.

With those definitions, the alignment for each language broadly makes sense to me. Lisp for example, is an academic language, yet a hackers tool, quirky, yet very regular. Hence true neutral.

@haskman @abnv with this explanation and the suggestion of swapping Rust and Erlang, it really does make sense โœŒ๏ธ
@abnv @haskman @randomgeek Hmmโ€ฆ I know @edwinb, and "lawful" isn't the first word that springs to mind. Definitely good though.
@pdcawley @abnv @haskman @randomgeek Definitely chaotic underneath, I know that much.