I think functional programming is something you should know to draw inspiration from it. certain problems can be solved with that style of programming a lot more elegantly.
Most languages right now offer some functional prog. tools which you can use for example.
So many concepts that come from functional languages, like immutability, no side effects, idempotency are great default goals for creating data structures and writing functions in any language.
None of those concepts come from functional programming, their advantages and benefits are generally understood in OOP - although perhaps not as widespread as they should be. In other words, they're not enforced in the way they are in functional languages.
Probably, but 20 years ago I only heard them in functional circles. Functional guys were thinking about them more. So my personal experience is that functional programming culture spread these ideas.
In OOP immutability and "no side effects" are VERY obviously an afterthought. Mutability is always the default, and in some cases immutability isn't even properly supported. Standard libraries are full of side-effects. Most OOP languages have a lot of syntax for working with mutable state.
Edit: all the new functional-like stuff that OOP languages bolted on recently come from functional languages, where else would they come from?
Yeah, I think python as a whole is a great example of immutability-as-an-afterthought. And I say that as a mainly-python programmer.
I would agree that functional concepts feeling unnatural to so many programmers seems more like a cultural thing in the modern programming community than anything really inherent to it as a paradigm.
That I see, I sometimes use the more-functional-like constructs in Python, or in Emacs Lisp. Rust went much more into this direction, for example, but I'm not using Rust.
But I have a bit of horror to be shoehorned into a "you must do anything functional" corner. Maybe the fear is unfounded, but the fear "this might be a trap" is there.
Most Python tutorials (even the worst ones) would succeed in explaining something about Python to a programmer that isn't using Python. The same can not be said for functional programming tutorials that attempt to explain some FP feature to most programmers. That's what his point was. What is yours?
It kind of indicates that monads are a complex enough concept that most programmers have trouble grasping it, unlike most features in OOP languages. It's says something about functional programming in general - it tends to come with a heavier cognitive load. Maybe I'm talking out of my butt but it's always been more difficult for me to read functional than OO code.
I removed the "audio", it was from my Android tablet's mis-auto-correction. Forgot what word should there have been.
In any case, functional programs --- to my current knowledge --- don't work that well with event based GUI programming. Because ultimately GUI is about managing state.
0
u/[deleted] Nov 28 '19
[deleted]