Are we in a functional revolution for programming? Is functional

>>58261190
It should have been the present.
Backus received the Turing Award for the Fortran Compiler(an imperative language, like C).
After that, he came to the CS community with the statement: Imperative programming is a mistake. Functional programming is the way to go. NEETS on this board won't ever understand just how HUGE this statement is. If Stroustrup ever came on stage and said: "C++ is a fuck up, should have never done it", even this would be nothing next to what Backus said.
However, Functional Programming is never going to be the future, because only 0.1% of the current programmers are able to understand Monads, because the rest are simply mediocre, even if they think they're great. Math has never been a strong point for most programmer, so we're doomed for eternity with unsafe languages.
Makes me want to kill myself, really.

>>58261311
Math degree here. Will I be good at functional programming? I can't program

>>58261190
It's been the future for 10 years now

>>58261328
Depends which math field. Functional programming is based on Category theory and Group theory, sprinkled with some Church encodings and Lambda calculus.
You know these, you're going to do great.

Pure functional? No. F# style? Yes.

>>58261311
why would we want the future of programming to be something that most programmers can't do? it sounds like some pretentious secret club shit to me. imo the future of programming is one where the skill is as ubiqitous as being literate i don't understand why people want to make technology more obtuse.

>>58261630
F# is easier than C# once you get the hang of it.

>>58261630
When you'll refactor 3 year old Haskell code in under an hour, without introducing new bugs, come back here. When you'll be able to automatically generate tests, and then automatically find bugs from those tests, come back here. This is literal perfection to people that that work on architectures of software.
Also, find me ONE haskell programmer that hates it. You'll find none. That's how good it is. Now do the same with Java, C++, C, Python...

You can't do this in your language(whatever it is)

ITT: Haskellfags pretending anyone outside of academia cares about their meme language of choice

>>58261700
thats all well and good but if the average person can't sit down with it and make something useful within a week its not useful.

>>58261913
>not useful
i meant not the future. of course its useful.

>>58261311
>After that, he came to the CS community with the statement: Imperative programming is a mistake. Functional programming is the way to go.
[citation needed]
>NEETS on this board won't ever understand just how HUGE this statement is.
fuck you too, I know what imperative programming is

>>58261962
>fuck you too, I know what imperative pr
I meant how huge it was to create the Fortran compiler and then saying that imperative programming is a mistake. I did not mean that people here don't know what it is, I meant that they wouldn't understand the importance of that statement, and, given your comment, i was right.

>>58261987
>oh god oh god oh god i'm so fuckking smart i love to smell my own ass i'm basically fucking programer jesus why isn't everyone sucking my cock ohgod oh god oh god

>>58261190
>Is functional programming the future

Jesus fucking christ has anyone on this board even left their basement in 20 years?

>>58262023
So...why aren't you?

>>58261925
Facebook uses Haskell extensively, same as Erlang. Their spam filter is written in Haskell. Also, their Sigma system handles one million req/s, and is written in Haskell.
The MEME ends NOW.

>>58261311
C++ is flexible. Java has the autistic OOP restrictions.

>>58261190
haskell will always be what amounts to a cult, it's not bad but its learning curve is too great for most to pick up

elixir will be the language to really give functional programming a foothold as all of the retarded rubyists are jumping on that train. luckily, elixir is also good.

>>58263055
>elixir
why should i learn it over haskell over any other functional programming language?

>>58263055
I think F# and Linq are leading the way.
Sadly, Javascript is paving this way, and it's doing a shitty job at it.

>>58263055
This is one language I really hope I learned it before I started my project.
I am now stuck with Python/Django for fucking ever.

>>58263110
elixir has a way simpler learning curve and compiles to BEAM bytecode giving you all the stability, concurrency, and power of erlang. elixir's ecosystem is rapidly growing and geared towards web development. it has actual potential in terms of using it careerwise (likely only in startup type companies though)

haskell is cool but it's like the programming equivalent of continental philosophy, it's almost intentionally obtuse and only powerful if you have a fundamental understanding of every aspect of it

File: clojure.png (16KB, 250x189px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 250x189px

did you guys forget about me?

>>58263192
>gears towards web
eh, so how's erlang then?
Really want to give functional programming a try but there's so many.
So far haskell as been one since it's at the center of a lot of discussion, but i want to try others too so i'm not biased.

>>58263055
>Railsfags polluting other languages

How sad. I feel really sorry for languages that this happens to, they're going to ruin everything. Nobody is going to see how good the language could be because all the code they'll see is from "internet-savvy", reddit, railsfags who post their garbage code everywhere online.

>>58263226
erlang is good but the syntax is offputting to most, which is why elixir exists in the first place. it's not like elixir is heavily geared towards web dev but that's the direction the ecosystem is moving. you can use it for pretty much anything.