From: William Djaja Tjokroaminata <billtj@...>
Date: 2002-08-22T22:15:28+09:00
Subject: Re: What New Language After Ruby?

Hi,

There is nothing wrong with functional programming in general.  It is only
for practicality reason.  For example, if we tell our supervisors that we
are going to develop in C/C++ or Java, there will be no question
asked.  It is hard enough to convince the use of Ruby to people who are in
charge of financial matters.  I think in the industry the use of
functional programming is much less than procedural language; and
therefore, I think, it is much harder to justify, because my guess is,
they think if it is not widely used, there must be something wrong with
it, and why we should use it.  Yes, for ourselves I have no problem at
all; the problem is only how to convince the people in charge.

Regards,

Bill
=============================================================================
Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla <dido@imperium.ph> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:52:30PM +0900, William Djaja Tjokroaminata wrote:
>> (hopefully the language can be considered to be "better" than Ruby in
>> some specific areas, or just simply has totally different approach;
>> hopefully also we will not have to consider Lisp-like programming
>> languages).

> What's wrong with Lisp, or functional programming in general?  I've done
> some work in functional languages such as OCaml and Scheme and can say
> it's a very powerful idea for certain problems, far better than Java or
> Ruby in many respects for certain problems, such as for doing AI work
> and compiler construction.

> -- 
> Rafael R. Sevilla <dido at imperium dot ph>	+63(2)8123151
> Software Developer, Imperium Technology Inc.	+63(917)4458925