The level of progress in #programming languages:
Shortly after the first ever programming language was created, it's author said that the language's whole paradigm actually sucks and we should do #functionalprogramming instead. That was 46 years ago. We still use the same paradigm.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/359576.359579
Can programming be liberated from the von Neumann style?: a functional style and its algebra of programs: Communications of the ACM: Vol 21, No 8
Conventional programming languages are growing ever more enormous, but not stronger.
Inherent defects at the most basic level cause them to be both fat and weak: their
primitive word-at-a-time style of programming inherited from their common ancestor—...
And FP was created even before that
(from "Programming Haskell" by Graham Huttom)
#functionalprogramming #haskell #lisp
@abuseofnotation Lisp I was already "pure", whatever it lmeans.
@fl @abuseofnotation If you think Lisp is pure, I have a RPLACD to sell you.
@barubary @abuseofnotation "If you think Lisp is pure, I have a RPLACD to sell you."
Lisp I was pure. Not Common Lisp.
@fl @abuseofnotation I refer you to section "9.3 Further Functions" on page 134 of the "LISP I Programmer's Manual", 1960.
@barubary @abuseofnotation OK. I will read more. Thank you Oriel Jutty.
@fl @barubary See comments above, being pure does not mean having only immutable data structures.
@abuseofnotation @barubary I agree with that but at least you need features to recognize the pure functions at first sight. In Lisp and specially in Lisp I they don't exist.
Jencel Panic
fl
Oriel Jutty 