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

函数式编程将很可能成为工程师和科学家用来解决他们所面临的问题的工具。它不会像早期的语言那样占领世界。然而,最难打败的产品是Excel,如果我是一名工程师,需要做计算,Excel是很棒的。

However, F# is going to be another source and will likely fill design needs by the non-Computer Scientists. Let's face it, Computer Scientists have done a great job of creating a WHOLE new way of doing things. Object Oriented Programming is GREAT. But sometimes you just need a way to solve an equation, get a solution and graph it. That's it. Then a language like F# fills the bill. Or maybe you want to build a finite state machine, F# again could be one of the solutions, but then C could be a solution as well.

但是当涉及到并行处理时,Excel大放异彩,f#也会及时出现。但是要以友好的方式,F#= friendly。

其他回答

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.

我没有看到任何人在这里提到房间里的大象,所以我认为这取决于我:)

JavaScript是一种函数式语言。随着越来越多的人使用JS做更高级的事情,特别是利用jQuery、Dojo和其他框架的优点,FP将通过web开发人员的后门引入。

与闭包结合使用,FP使JS代码非常轻便,但仍然可读。

欢呼, PS

我认为你问题的答案更多地在于“工作的正确工具”这句话,而不是最热门的东西。总会有热门的新技术,也总会有人扑上去。

函数式语言已经出现了一段时间,只是现在它们得到了更多的报道。

Slava Akhmechet写了一篇很棒的文章,叫做《函数式编程》(顺便说一下,正是这篇文章让我开始接触FP)。在FP带来的好处中,他非常规地强调了以下几点(我认为这有助于软件工程师的吸引力):

单元测试 调试 并发性 热码部署 机器辅助证明与优化

然后继续讨论FP中更多传统讨论的方面的优点,如高阶函数、咖喱、惰性求值、优化、抽象控制结构(尽管没有讨论单子)、无限数据结构、严格性、延续、模式匹配、闭包等。

强烈推荐!

对我来说,主要的优点是它固有的并行性,特别是当我们现在从更多的MHz转向越来越多的内核时。

我不认为它会成为下一个编程范式并完全取代OO类型方法,但我确实认为我们将会达到这样的境地:要么我们需要用函数式语言编写一些代码,要么我们的通用语言将会发展到包含更多的函数式结构。