What are the properties of "Functional Programming Languages"?
1 - Please let standardize the dynamically-typed, statically-typed, weakly-typed and strongly-typed definitions. We have 2 dimensions here:
strongly-typed: Every value has a type and can not implicitly be converted.
Haskell, C#, Java are statically-typed and strongly-typed.
(Unfortunately even in MIT Schema description (PDF) this concepts are used misunderstoodly)
(Let's for now forget about things like Linear typed languages.)
2 - Now in every of mentioned groups, which features must be implemented for that the language could be assumed as a functional one?
Is "purity" really needed in a language to be considered as functional programming? Personally I do not think so. Because I think functional programming is about higher-order composability. For example structural-composability gives you the power to make more pluggable codes.
So again the question:
Active forum topics
New forum topics