1. 33
  1.  

  2. 4

    Oldie but a Goodie

    1. 3

      Doesn’t this need a haskell tag as well?

      1. 4

        It’s of broader interest than that, I think. I can see why one might disagree, but thinking to oneself about what constitutes “purely functional” doesn’t seem to me to be exclusively the purview of Haskellers. I think Conal raises an interesting question and makes people think about abstraction in a nice way here.

        1. 2

          Yeah but he specifically addresses Haskell in his comparison, comparing C to the IO monad.

          1. 1

            If there is a more widely known pure functional language that has an IO monad to draw contrast with, you should let us know.

            1. 6

              Not that I know of. Regardless, he still directly addressed Haskell, so a tag wouldn’t be unreasonable.