6
jassole
106d

New folks, learn functional programming. Avoid the stupid pain with OOP and mutability. Pays off a lot and for ffs, increase your salary demand, don't lowball, so everyone can enjoy higher pay.

Comments
  • 0
    100% agreed. Functional programming really incentivices cleaner code and you can apply those habits everywhere else. OOP is fine with anything as long as it's in some GetterFactory.
  • 1
    Waiting for c/c++ people bitching functional programming performance 😂
  • 0
    Well jassole, you can be an asshole, so.. I will learn it after I finish learning OOP. Thanks for the tip!
  • 19
    Lemme fix that for you:
    New folks, learn good programming basics and fundamental engineering principles, because there are no magic one-size-fits-all solutions.
  • 0
    @RememberMe Isn’t accepting there isn’t a “One-size fits all” kinda a “One-size fits all”?
  • 7
    @RicoNijeboer yes, but it's not a good *engineering* solution because "solution: we need to find a solution" doesn't help you in any way.
  • 0
    @RememberMe Thou art correct
  • 2
    Functional is not the silver bullet. Just like OOP isn't one.
  • 1
    @h3rp1d3v you can do functional with C++. It gives zero shits about your code style.
  • 1
    @iiii I disagree. Functional is a silver bullet to OOP. Newbies are like I want to use this pattern just for the sake of practicing OOP. With functional = less patterns, design needs to be thought out and structured.
  • 0
    @h3rp1d3v dude listen, if You can’t fucking read your 600 lines of code in a single file, can you really say your code is solid?

    I mean let’s stop this shitty functional code thing: I want people who try to spy on my colleagues to just give up and cry, not to help them. Especially my colleagues. 😤

    I dream of a code with so many lines in a single file it collapses on itself, creating a black hole, therefore the most solid thing possible.

    Stupid fluffy functional code. Ooh look at me, I can change code without breaking everything!
    Pfft! Weaklings!

    …I swear they put something in the water, it’s two weeks I keep going for these stupid jokes. 😅
  • 4
    Functional is good when the aim is to compute something. Only that a lot of software is not about computation, but behaviour.
  • 3
    @jassole functional and OOP aren't mutually exclusive btw. It's also very easy to write spaghetti functional code. I use Haskell, Rust, OCaml, SML, and WhyML regularly and nothing in them prevents me from turning everything into an unintelligible soup.
  • 2
    @jassole you are mixing cause and effect. Patterns are used where they are needed, not just because they exist at all.

    Functional does not mean "less patterns". There are as many patterns but different ones. Patterns are just that: patterns. They are not laws imposed by something, but solutions emerging from common problems.
  • 0
    It's much easier to write spaghetti code with OOP using multiple level of inheritance. Personally haven't got into trouble with interfacing with data oriented design or pure functional codebase 💕.
  • 0
    @iiii Who the fuck use pure functional programming in C++ 😂 good luck with all those copying and cache line hit rate
  • 1
    Pleas explain to me how you would only use functional programming to design a large enterprise system with bounded contexts. And it should still be functional, not procedural.
  • 1
    Btw., given that functional is suited for computing things, why is it that there's no competetive chess engine in Haskell? Most are basically abandoned at early stages, and the only one that made it even to decent mid-range is Barbarossa.

    It's also the best engine in any functional language that I know of, and performance is hardly the problem because there's ChessBrainVB among the Top 50 - written in fucking VBA.
  • 2
    @h3rp1d3v no one, because that makes literally no sense. Pure functional approach is impossible in practice, just because your program needs to interact with outside world and that interaction is a huge side effect in itself.
  • 3
    Someone doesn't understand a single paradigm doesn't apply to everything.
  • 0
    @iiii Who the fuck uses OOP in JavaScript. JS is "technically a OOP" programming language.
  • 2
    @h3rp1d3v why is JavaScript a topic now?
  • 0
    @iiii right, c++ is real programming language, but js is not. I am dumb
  • 3
    @h3rp1d3v you are dumb because you are talking like that. Tried turning off the "woman brain" and speaking rationally without hopping back and forth between unrelated conclusions?
  • 0
    @iiii I am not sure who is the dumb one who can't understand the domain of the problem. Have you ever seen game engine devs promoting functional programming? If you use Java/c++ for work, no one asks you to use pure functional programming.
  • 2
    @h3rp1d3v I'm tired of switching from one thing to another with little coherence. I'll just leave you alone with your thoughts at this point
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop You are wrong. Functional programming is so far ahead than just pure function computations. Look at Scala and cats effect.
  • 0
    @mundo03 Someone wants to hold on to their dear job using spaggheti code.
  • 0
    @jassole That doesn't answer my question.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop Your question is why is nobody writing a freaking chess-engine in functional programming lol?
  • 1
    @jassole The question why no competetive engine in a functional language exists although that kind of application looks like a good fit for functional programming. And why the best try ended up only mid-range, while the rest basically gave up once they tought their engine the rules of chess. I have already ruled out "speed" as answer.

    Btw., ridiculing the question doesn't count as answer.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop Do you always wait for others to come up with something so it is "safe" for you to follow that path? Or you do it yourself?

    There are countless applications written in functional world. There are plenty of closed source application using functional programming especially in finance that has proven its reliability. What specifically are you looking for?
  • 1
    @jassole Functional programming isn't anything new because Haskell has been around for ages. I think I made it clear what I'm looking for, and my question is why it doesn't exist.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop You should look outside Haskell, i.e Scala, F#, OCaml. Look how all major languages are stealing ideas out of the functional world. Haskell is only testbed of functional ideas.

    Yes it isn't new, but it hasn't caught with majority with the devs.
  • 0
    @jassole The mid-range example I already mentioned is already the best engine that I know of in ANY functional language.
  • 0
    This thread is hilarious 😂 I thought schools are out of touch.
  • 4
    @jassole someone still doesn't understand the spaghetti does not come from the cookware but from the cheff.
  • 1
    @mundo03 Real devs can code Fortran in any language.
  • 0
    See you're actually able to write a sentence without whining about leftists
  • 1
    @ostream If you're already spam-reviving ancient threads can you at least not make it about offtopic political brain diarrhea?
  • 0
    @deadlyRants let me think about it
  • 0
    @deadlyRants I don't think I can, no. Let me explain further. He broke a site-wide rule by whining about politics in 80% of his rant, exposing his retardness in a manner that could only stir controversy, so I do feel authorized to make fun of this idiot.

    It's a matter of accountability. May I remind you that this platform is not moderated.
  • 1
    Just fight your epic battle of justice somewhere else, please. I don't like that garbage either, that's why I'm here and not on Shitter.
  • 0
    @deadlyRants Of course. Would you mind asking him nicely to stop talking shit and bring out his idiotic politics everytime his fingers touch the keyboard?

    I too have better things to do than educating childish idiots. But somebody have to do it. It's God work right there.
Add Comment