Anonymous user
User talk:Jhuni: Difference between revisions
→Is JavaScript functional?: new section
(→Please summarize edits: new section) |
(→Is JavaScript functional?: new section) |
||
Line 6:
Sorry if this comes across as a bit brusque; I just can't think of a better way to phrase it. Here, I'll include a smiley face: :-) -- [[User:Eriksiers|Eriksiers]] 20:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
== Is [[JavaScript]] functional? ==
You wrote in a commit log message:
:“JavaScript is not a functional language because it does not have pure functions, immutable data structures, a type system, or good parameter-handling features. It has lambdas but so does VB 9.”
However you then proceeded to mark [[D]] as being functional despite that not having pure functions or consistently immutable data structures either. (The points about a type system are arguable — that's better handled on a different characterization axis IMO — and if you're going to argue that parameter handling is the marker of a functional language then I'll mock you mercilessly.) As such, you're being inconsistent; whether or not a language is in a category has got to be distinct from whether or not you approve of it. For the record, I think that JavaScript probably belongs in a similar category to [[Lisp]] or [[Scheme]]; it's only the syntax and the libraries that are really all that different. –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 15:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
| |||