From: Mike Stephens <rubfor@...>
Date: 2011-04-15T15:25:20+09:00
Subject: Re: functional paradigm taking over

>Michal Suchanek wrote in post #992724:
> Calling something a programming language does in my book imply that
> - it is meant to be used by humans
> - it is meant to give instructions to some system, such as a
> computer, an application, etc.
>
> This implies that Excel is not a programming language

Michal, there have been many such non-sequiturs in this thread, but that
is the most elegantly simple.

I apologise for bringing Excel into the discussion - which was supposed
to be about people's thoughts on functional programming languages. Excel
- like functional languages - makes you come up with new patterns.

My defence is it's like introducing a new recruit to the village cricket
team, then people find out he's gay. I'm not to know in advance whether
they find that peripheral aspect irrelevant, interesting or an extremely 
serious matter.

Going back to functional languages in the normal sense, few people on 
this thread seem to be
that interested, and when I've mentioned them in a work context
(typically .NET), nobody's bothered.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.