我在这里看到很多关于函数式语言的讨论。为什么你要使用传统语言而不是传统语言呢?他们在哪些方面做得更好?他们更不擅长什么?理想的函数式编程应用程序是什么?
当前回答
我个人认为,对于分布式系统和多线程/并行编程,函数式编程将很快取得突破。只要它通过编程库与现有的OOP范式集成。所以…在我看来,纯功能的方法仍将停留在学术上。
其他回答
很多人都提到了函数式语言。
除了Javascript,还有一些最常用的函数式语言。
Excel、SQL、XSLT、XQuery、J、K等应用于金融领域。
当然是Erlang。
所以我想说,从这个列表中,函数式编程技术每天都在主流中使用。
实际上,在阅读了《黑客与画家》之后,我正在学习LISP,我相信我会从LISP中学到一些东西,这将使我更好地理解我所编程的其他东西。现在我不认为我会在我的日常生活中使用LISP,只是因为有人在1995年创建了一个网站,成为雅虎商店。所以无论如何这是一个双赢(如果它流行起来,我赢了,如果没有,我得到了更多关于如何编程和如何工作的观点)
现在…关于另一个有点相关的问题,我认为明年32核处理器到来后编程会发生很大变化吗?是的,我不知道它是否会是函数式编程,但是…我很确定会有一些不同的东西!
我一直对“下一件大事”持怀疑态度。很多时候,下一个大事件纯粹是历史的偶然,无论技术好坏,它都在正确的时间出现在正确的地点。例如:c++, Tcl/Tk, Perl。所有的技术都是有缺陷的,都非常成功,因为它们被认为要么解决了当时的问题,要么与根深蒂固的标准几乎相同,或者两者兼而有之。函数式编程可能确实很棒,但这并不意味着它会被采用。
But I can tell you why people are excited about functional programming: many, many programmers have had a kind of "conversion experience" in which they discover that using a functional language makes them twice as productive (or maybe ten times as productive) while producing code that is more resilient to change and has fewer bugs. These people think of functional programming as a secret weapon; a good example of this mindset is Paul Graham's Beating the Averages. Oh, and his application? E-commerce web apps.
自2006年初以来,也有一些关于函数式编程和并行的讨论。因为像Simon Peyton Jones这样的人至少从1984年开始就一直在担心并行性,所以在函数式语言解决多核问题之前,我不会屏住呼吸。但它确实解释了目前一些额外的话题。
In general, American universities are doing a poor job teaching functional programming. There's a strong core of support for teaching intro programming using Scheme, and Haskell also enjoys some support there, but there's very little in the way of teaching advanced technique for functional programmer. I've taught such a course at Harvard and will do so again this spring at Tufts. Benjamin Pierce has taught such a course at Penn. I don't know if Paul Hudak has done anything at Yale. The European universities are doing a much better job; for example, functional programming is emphasized in important places in Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. I have less of a sense of what's happening in Australasia.
如果一个人看不到其他艺术的价值,他就无法理解他所选择的艺术的完美和不完美。遵循规则只允许在技术上发展到一定程度,然后学生和艺术家必须学习更多,进一步探索。在学习战略艺术的同时,学习其他艺术也是有意义的。
谁没有通过观察别人的活动来更多地了解自己呢?要学剑,就要学吉他。要学商业,先学商业。只学习刀剑会使你心胸狭窄,不能向外成长。
——宫本武藏《五环之书》
我不认为函数式编程方法“流行起来”有任何问题,因为它(作为一种编程风格)已经被使用了大约40年。每当OO程序员编写有利于不可变对象的干净代码时,这些代码就是借用了函数概念。
然而,这些天来,强制函数式风格的语言正在获得大量的虚拟墨水,这些语言是否会在未来占据主导地位是一个悬而未决的问题。我自己的怀疑是混合的、多范式的语言,如Scala或OCaml 将很可能统治“纯粹的”函数语言,就像纯粹的OO语言(Smalltalk、Beta等)影响了主流编程一样,但还没有成为最广泛使用的表示法。
最后,我忍不住要指出,你对FP的评论与我几年前从过程程序员那里听到的评论高度相似:
(恕我直言,这是神话)“普通”程序员不理解它。 这并没有被广泛教授。 任何你能用它来写的程序,都能用现有的技术以另一种方式来写。
Just as graphical user interfaces and "code as a model of the business" were concepts that helped OO become more widely appreciated, I believe that increased use of immutability and simpler (massive) parallelism will help more programmers see the benefits that the functional approach offers. But as much as we've learned in the past 50 or so years that make up the entire history of digital computer programming, I think we still have much to learn. Twenty years from now, programmers will look back in amazement at the primitive nature of the tools we're currently using, including the now-popular OO and FP languages.