IssueRaiser

As far as I can tell, the argument is that allowing side effects inside functions allows programmers to make mistakes, and therefore "mos...

As far as I can tell, the argument is that allowing side effects inside functions allows programmers to make mistakes, and therefore "mostly functional" programming is broken. I'll happily extend this: "fully functional" programming does not work because I can define a mathematical function that divides by 0, and therefore does not work. I'd go a step further even: all programming does not work, because I can solve a problem in the wrong way if I make a mistake.

Posted by RyanZAG on Jun 22, 2015, 12:33 PM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.6,000 issues0 comments

reliability (Other)

As far as I can tell, the argument is that allowing side effects inside functions allows programmers to make mistakes, and therefore "mos...

RyanZAGJun 22, 2015, 12:33 PM

As far as I can tell, the argument is that allowing side effects inside functions allows programmers to make mistakes, and therefore "mostly functional" programming is broken. I'll happily extend this: "fully functional" programming does not work because I can define a mathematical function that divides by 0, and therefore does not work. I'd go a step further even: all programming does not work, because I can solve a problem in the wrong way if I make a mistake.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue