Search Results

Search found 18249 results on 730 pages for 'real world haskell'.

Page 77/730 | < Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >

  • Introducing functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in understanding and using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • Functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Also, I asked myself if my impression is just plainly wrong due to lack of knowledge. E.g., do C# and C++11 support FP as extensively as, say, Scala or Caml do? In this case, my question would be simply non-existent. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • I don't program in my spare time. Does that make me a bad developer?

    - by not-my-real-name
    A lot of blogs and advice on the web seem to suggest that in order to become a great developer, doing just your day job is not enough. For example, you should contribute to open source projects in your spare time, write smartphone apps, etc. In fact a lot of this advice seems to suggest that if you don't love programming enough to do it all day long then you're probably in the wrong career. That doesn't ring true with me. I enjoy my work, but when I come home from the office I'm not in the mood to jump straight back onto the computer and start coding away until bedtime. I only have a certain number of hours free time each day, and I'd rather spend them on other hobbies, seeing friends or going outside than in front of the computer. I do get a kick out of programming, and do hack around outside of work occasionally. I'm committed to my personal development and spend time reading tech blogs and books as a way to keep learning and becoming better. But that doesn't extend so far as to my wanting to use all my spare time for coding. Does this mean I'm not a 'true' software developer at heart? Is it possible to become a good software developer without doing extra outside your job? I'd be very interested to hear what you think.

    Read the article

  • Programming error in 'aptdaemon' [closed]

    - by Real
    Using Ubuntu 11.10 While performing updates through the update manager I get the following message: An unhandlable error occured There seems to be a programming error in aptdaemon, the software that allows you to install/remove software and to perform other package management related tasks. Details Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/aptdaemon/worker.py", line 968, in simulate trans.unauthenticated = self._simulate_helper(trans) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/aptdaemon/worker.py", line 1092, in _simulate_helper return depends, self._cache.required_download, \ File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/apt/cache.py", line 235, in required_download pm.get_archives(fetcher, self._list, self._records) SystemError: E:Method has died unexpectedly!, E:Sub-process returned an error code (100), E:Method /usr/lib/apt/methods/ did not start correctly Tried some of the fixes that were posted but did not work. What shall I do to fix this issue?

    Read the article

  • What is the Real Geek "Must do before die" Checklist? [closed]

    - by Osama Gamal
    Hi All, While browsing my favorites, I found that page: http://dailycupoftech.com/2009/05/04/the-geek-must-do-before-you-die-checklist/ I think that some points isn't geeky anymore. Plus, I really wanna know if there are other things that the real geek must do before die? In your opinion, What is the most important things that you -as a geek- MUST do before you die? :)

    Read the article

  • I have a list of names, some of them are fake, I need to use NLP and Python 3.1 to keep the real nam

    - by Sho Minamimoto
    I have no clue of where to start on this. I've never done any NLP and only programmed in a Python 3.1, which I have to use. I'm looking at the site http://www.linkedin.com and I have to gather all of the public profiles and some of them have very fake names, like 'aaaaaa k dudujjek' and I've been told I can use NLP to find the real names, where would I even start?

    Read the article

  • Where I can download the REAL Full .Net Framework 4 Standalone Installer?

    - by Click Ok
    I found that links: Microsoft .NET Framework 4 (Web Installer) Microsoft .NET Framework 4 (Standalone Installer) Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Client Profile (Standalone Installer) Note that (2) the size is 48.0 MB and the (3) the size is 41.0 MB. It's not the REAL .Net 4 Full Standalone. :( I want that installer in a usb pen drive because my app need of features of .Net 4 Full Framework (like MSBuild) and I will install in a enviroment without Internet access. PS: I tested the (2) and really is the Client Profile with another name... :(

    Read the article

  • How do I use an Entity Framework 4 model without a real database?

    - by Ivan
    I don't need any data to be stored. I'd like an application to start, create an Entity Framework entities container based on the model I've designed but having no data records in it, then generate some data (from user input and other input sources), work with it and discard all the data on close, without propagating any data operations made with EF contect to a real database hosted on server or in a file. How do I implement such a pattern? I use Entity Framework 4 and Visual Studio 2010.

    Read the article

  • How to emulate a real http request via cfhttp?

    - by maectpo
    Hi, I need to emulate a real http request via cfhttp. I was getting rss feed with ColdFusion, but tonight they started to block my request and send an index page in response instead of rss fead. I added useragent for cfhttp, but it doesn't help. Opera, Firefox and Chrome open feed correctly from the same computer.

    Read the article

  • How does Android emulator performance compare to real device performance?

    - by uj2
    I'm looking into writing an Android game, tough I don't curerntly own an Android device. For those of you who own a device, how does the performance on the emulator relate to real device performance? I'm especially interested in graphics related tasks. This obviously depends on both the machine running the emulator, and the specific device in question, but I'm talking rough numbers here. This question is a duplicate, but since that post is heavily outdated, I figured it's irrelevant by now.

    Read the article

  • When will Unladen Swallow be "done" or "ready" for real use?

    - by orokusaki
    It looks like Google hasn't updated the results section since the Q4 2009 posting. I've been wondering when it will be put in the Python trunk, and if it's, in any way, production ready. Also, "We aspire to do no original work" is in the Q4 plan. Did Google bite off more than what they could handle, or does anyone know what the real story is?

    Read the article

  • Is generating real random numbers this easy in C#?

    - by JL
    I found this code using Google. private int RandomNumber(int min, int max) { Random random = new Random(); return random.Next(min, max); } Is this really all there is to generating REAL random numbers in C#? I intend to generate on a small scale between values 1-10. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How can I write a "Hello World" app in assembly language?

    - by SLC
    I've often heard of applications written using the language of the gods, assembly language. I've never tried though, and I don't even have a clue how to do it. If I wanted to dabble, how would I go about doing it? I know absolutely nothing about what is required, although presumably some kind of compiler and Notepad. Just purely out of curiousity, what would I need to write a "Hello World!" application?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >