-
Also, I don't think that the "criteria for a concept or a theory to be valid" provided by
@runarorama don't seem to be valid themselves, or reject many useful concepts (including Functional Programming)
Functional Programming has a meaning. Using this meaning, we can investigate consequences. We can build more meanings. OOP does not have a meaning. No useful inferences have been made from the OOP thesis. Here is the most honest admission of this fact:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZlxBRnxzDc#t=4117 …
-
-
I'd even go further: Functional Programming is all about meaning. But natural language isn't. The "game of meaning" is just one of the many language games we can play. Saying that "functional programming exists" and "object-oriented programming doesn't exist" is another game.
-
I think all you've done is advertise your own epistemology. Unsubsribe, please.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Tony Morris, who is a revered, non-compromising FPer who is famous for basically never giving an inch in intellectual purity debate and being memorable for that, he submitted 20 questions" - disappointed not to see any of them asked - just watched the whole 2 hours
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.