Re: ID field as logical address
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 20:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <e4e05850-b5dc-4b26-9a38-9ddc98f66cea_at_v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
On Jun 4, 3:11 am, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:
>
> When it comes to people who prefer imperative programs because they can
> see no other way, it ends up meaning religious.
If someone (even very intelligent) /always/ prefers an imperative style it suggests both ignorance and a closed mind. I guess you could call that attitude "religious" - although I wonder whether it's better to reserve that word for blind faith in something unknown rather than what's known.
I find the different styles of writing programs fascinating, and wish I understood better when and why one approach is simpler than another. I certainly don't believe that an imperative style is always inferior. Sometimes an ordered sequence of state changes is exactly what is appropriate - just like when following a cooking recipe. In some situations expressing a sequence of steps indirectly using logical declarations as constraints can increase complexity.
I also don't believe that a program should restrict itself to one style. An ideal language is simple yet supports a wide range of styles. Unfortunately these appear to be conflicting aims. Received on Thu Jun 04 2009 - 05:03:09 CEST