Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. What is holding back functional programming?

What is holding back functional programming?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questionregexfunctionaldiscussionlearning
12 Posts 7 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Duncan Edwards Jones
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

    R 9 K G J 5 Replies Last reply
    0
    • D Duncan Edwards Jones

      I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Rage
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Because"the long established other paradigms do the job, so why change" ?

      Do not escape reality : improve reality !

      D 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Rage

        Because"the long established other paradigms do the job, so why change" ?

        Do not escape reality : improve reality !

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Duncan Edwards Jones
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Yeah - that was what held back object-oriented programming...until it didn't.

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • D Duncan Edwards Jones

          Yeah - that was what held back object-oriented programming...until it didn't.

          R Offline
          R Offline
          Rage
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          With the difference maybe that the multi-paradigm languages actually do a pretty good job.

          Do not escape reality : improve reality !

          D 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R Rage

            With the difference maybe that the multi-paradigm languages actually do a pretty good job.

            Do not escape reality : improve reality !

            D Offline
            D Offline
            Duncan Edwards Jones
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Object oriented languages (including C#) are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations, but we have got so used to working around this that we don't see it. I remember a similar thing with pre-OO code where we just couldn't imagine why you'd put the data and the code together.

            R N K 3 Replies Last reply
            0
            • D Duncan Edwards Jones

              Object oriented languages (including C#) are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations, but we have got so used to working around this that we don't see it. I remember a similar thing with pre-OO code where we just couldn't imagine why you'd put the data and the code together.

              R Offline
              R Offline
              Rage
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Duncan Edwards Jones wrote:

              are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations

              Which means that functional programming not ? Then I have to have a closer look at it :cool:

              Do not escape reality : improve reality !

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

                9 Offline
                9 Offline
                9082365
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Dysfunctional programmers?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                  Object oriented languages (including C#) are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations, but we have got so used to working around this that we don't see it. I remember a similar thing with pre-OO code where we just couldn't imagine why you'd put the data and the code together.

                  N Offline
                  N Offline
                  Nagy Vilmos
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  In my not humble, but bloody good, opinion if the language needs to 'do multithreading' then you're doing it wrong. Write good code that does what it is supposed to do, then the process can be placed in a multithreaded do-hickey quantum runbot and your good to go. The amount of times I've had the same old argument, if you need to know how to set up queues and threads to handle them in the every day environment then you're application framework is FUBAR.

                  veni bibi saltavi

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                    I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

                    K Offline
                    K Offline
                    Kevin McFarlane
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Duncan Edwards Jones wrote:

                    steep learning curve for juniors...?

                    And for not so juniors! It's like the shift from procedural to OO initially. Plus most of the line of business applications I do seem to have no need for it. I have dabbled a bit in F# though. I like to keep aware of what else is out there - for the day I may need it. :)

                    Kevin

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                      Object oriented languages (including C#) are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations, but we have got so used to working around this that we don't see it. I remember a similar thing with pre-OO code where we just couldn't imagine why you'd put the data and the code together.

                      K Offline
                      K Offline
                      Kevin McFarlane
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Duncan Edwards Jones wrote:

                      Object oriented languages (including C#) are truly awful in multithreaded / parallel situations, but we have got so used to working around this that we don't see it.

                      Actors is the latest fashion. I assume you've looked at the recently-released Akka.NET and MS Project Orleans? The former seems more approachable IMO, though I've only done "Hello World." Of course, Actors are "new" but not new since they were invented over 40 years ago! :) But it will appear new to most devs. Often the way with "new" tech.

                      Kevin

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                        I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

                        G Offline
                        G Offline
                        Gjeltema
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        This answer by a former C# compiler developer (Eric Lippert) on SO is pretty good.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • D Duncan Edwards Jones

                          I went to a talk on Functional Programming (related to CQRS) and it just seems like such a natural match. This got me wondering - why isn't functional programming far more widely used than it is? (Thoughts I had - lack of visualisation tooling, and steep learning curve for juniors...?)

                          J Offline
                          J Offline
                          Jeremy Falcon
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          It took OOP a while to catch on, this is no different.

                          Jeremy Falcon

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups