// , “It is not so important to be serious as it is to be serious about the important things. The monkey wears an expression of seriousness... but the monkey is serious because he itches."(No/No)
Elaborate, how would you define it? and is there a definition where you would say that is indeed the norm or at least more common than typically perceived?
I would define it as strictly based on lambda calculus e.g. referential transparency, immutability and no side effects (to do io you would be forced to use monads). There are not a lot of languages according to this definition. There are a lot of functional-ish languages. But not everybody would agree with this definition, that is why I'm asking
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Depends on how you define functional programming.
// , Why does it depend on how you define functional programming?
Elaborate, how would you define it? and is there a definition where you would say that is indeed the norm or at least more common than typically perceived?
I would define it as strictly based on lambda calculus e.g. referential transparency, immutability and no side effects (to do io you would be forced to use monads). There are not a lot of languages according to this definition. There are a lot of functional-ish languages. But not everybody would agree with this definition, that is why I'm asking