Functional programming vs. "OO" programming (or, How to entirely miss the point) (developerdotstar.com)
Summed up:
...I can give my impressions of the funtional aspects of what I call free-floating functions.
What I mean by a free-floating function is a function that is not tied to a class. For example:
doSomething(thingToDo);
as opposed to
ThingDoer.doSomething(thingToDo);
The thing I've never liked about languages that allow free-floating functions is that they lead to sloppiness and confusion. Where does the magic non-name-spaced function exist? How can I access it? What do I need to import/include to get to it? What happens if there are different doSomething() funcions I want to use?
11 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 28.0 ms ] threadfeels dumb
Why submit an article written by someone who criticizes that which he doesn't even grasp the basics of when you're fully aware of his irrelevance?
Actually, it's not funny at all. His attitude is a perfect example of how many 9-5 programmers act when faced with functional programming.
If he was a .NET developer he'd be using the new functional features of .NET 2.0 and greater in the same old imperative way and would just continue to miss the point.
I guess the reason why I thought this worthy of being posted was not to make fun of this guy personally, but to use his kind of thinking as an example.
Is that uncharitable of me?
If you think it is, then you'd probably downvote all the dailywtf.com submissions, too. Right?
Ahhh, there it is.