Re: OO versus RDB

From: Daniel Parker <danielaparker_at_gmail.com>
Date: 6 Jul 2006 11:47:19 -0700
Message-ID: <1152211639.179094.14940@s26g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Marshall wrote:
> Daniel Parker wrote:
> >
> > I think what I would like to have is a hybrid language, that would
> > allow me to implement a function with imperative techniques, permitting
> > mutable data structures for building immutable objects, aka
> > StringBuffer/String in Java, and a pure functional higher view. Does
> > that sound sensible? Or stupid?
>
> Sounds exactly right. Functional by default, imperative when necessary.
>
> It's also entirely possible (as I think you're implying) to have a
> language
> that allowed one to write a function that is "pure" (in that its
> outputs
> depend solely on its parameters) but whose implementation was
> imperative. The functional guys *hate* it when I point this out. :-)
>

Yet this is exactly what I want :-) The advantages of functional programming in the large seem to be so evident, and the need to do nitty gritty things in the small seem so clear.

Regards,
Daniel Parker Received on Thu Jul 06 2006 - 13:47:19 CDT