[erlang-questions] odd one out
Tue Jan 11 16:53:42 CET 2011
regard it a functional language. i dont know if node differs from
traditional JS but i could write a book (10 in fact) on side effects in
to encounter, i think that it gives a misleading impression to all other
functional languages to label js one, and
even attempting functional programming in the browser in JS is
still uniquely tricky. i would personaly say that most language can be made
On 11 January 2011 15:01, Toby Thain <> wrote:
> On 11-01-11 10:54 AM, nox wrote:
> > Le 11 janv. 2011 à 14:48, Steve Vinoski a écrit :
> >> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:41 AM, James Churchman
> >> <> wrote:
> >>> can anyone spot the (very) odd one out !
> >>> http://qconlondon.com/london-2011/tracks/show_track.jsp?trackOID=424
> >> Hmm, let's see...the track host? ;-)
> >> Not sure what you're getting at, but are you hinting that node.js
> >> isn't written in a functional language? If so, you should know that
> >> example?
> >> --steve
> > I wouldn't say ECMAScript doesn't support functional programming, but it
> sure is not its main paradigm. And since when jQuery was called
> "functional"? For me, functional programming is very tied to the concept of
> pure functions and jQuery is pretty much a big object encapsulating in-place
> modifications of the DOM.
> Wouldn't one have to see how *the code cited* is structured? Something
> makes me doubt it's what a Lisper would call 'functional'.
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Anthony Ramine
> > Dev:Extend
> > http://dev-extend.eu
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> > See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> > To unsubscribe; mailto:
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:
More information about the erlang-questions