|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> I don't really understand all the graphics-related stuff that's
>> happening, but the definition of rule 30 itself seems relatively
>> straight-forward.
>
> I just thought it seemed like a language where creating forms, graphics
> and pixels was quite easy, without much need for boilerplate code.
Yeah, I'd need to sit down and learn the language syntax and how allthe
UI stuff actually works. (Every UI system seemingly has its own entirely
different event model and so forth...)
>> (I did briefly look at F# a while back, but abandoned it because it's
>> not really functional.)
>
> ...Wikipedia claims it is functional
People claim that Erlang is functional too. ;-) Hell, some people say
Lisp is functional...
> But I'll believe you because I know almost nothing about this subject!
Heh. ;-)
In fairness, if F# was *actually* functional, it wouldn't run very well
on the .NET runtime, nor interface with the .NET libraries. Both of
these things are object-oriented, not functional. So there are some
unavoidable design compromises to be made. If you accept that you're
designing a language to fit in with a large monolithic OO system,
there's a limit to how functional you can easily make it. So it's not
like they just don't know how to design a functional language...
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |