Common Lisp has a pretty interesting OO system that has a dynamic
character to it reminiscent of Javascript or old-school AS, but that
supports polymorphism through a thing called generic functions -- a
function contains multiple implementations and selects the one that's
defined as being for the class closes to the first argument. I guess
that's kinda Pythonish in a way too. If Lispy syntax doesn't bother
you, it makes for a nice mixture of OO and Lisp's functional heritage.
I definitely wouldn't call it "purely" functional though... in a
pure-functional language like Haskell, I imagine that objects would have
to be implemented as some kind of monad.
CHUCK HOFFMAN
PROGRAMMER
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x150 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential, and
may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to
the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please
delete it. Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Herrman
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 1:24 PM
To: Flashcoders mailing list
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Q:The case for Functional vs OOP programming
Flash is fairly unrestrictive, and you can do some functional
programming in it, but I wouldn't really call it a functional
language. It still seems designed as a procedural language, just with
some constructs that allow you to do functional-style programming
(first-order functions).
I know some people who would probably be very upset if you tried to
call Flash a functional programming language. :)
-Andy
On 1/22/07, Hans Wichman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> i'd say flash is fairly unrestrictive (compared to java) in what you
can or
> cannot do.
> If I look at Joel's javascript samples, most of them copy directly to
> actionscript.
> Wrap'm in an Example class and a combo is born:)
> Or am I making this seem to easy?:)
>
> greetz
> JC
>
>
> On 1/22/07, Andy Herrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Unhijacking of thread is a go!
> >
> > I haven't really used any functional language stuff for a couple
> > years, so I may be off base a bit, but I'm not sure if you could
> > really create a language that's both Functional and OOP, as OOP is a
> > fairly procedural construct.
> >
> > The main problem I see is that OOP and Functional programming really
> > work in very different ways. One way is really based off of and
built
> > on top of Objects and their data, while Functional programming is
> > based on the algorithms. I don't know if you could come up with a
> > good mix of the two without compromising the benefits of them (you'd
> > be more likely to get a "None of the benefits, all of the
> > shortcomings" than "All of the benefits, none of the shortcomings").
> > I could see a language that does mix them as a good stepping stone
for
> > someone to move from OOP to FP, but not as something that serious
OOP
> > or FP programmers would use.
> >
> > Then again, it has been a while since I worked with FP, so I could
be
> > completely wrong (not unheard of). :)
> >
> > -Andy
> >
> > On 1/21/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I am a strong believer of the power of OOP, but recently came
across
> > > the following blog posts that argue for the advantges, and some
would
> > > say supremacy of functional over imperative/procedural and OOP
> > > programming.
> > >
> > >
http://blog.lostlake.org/index.php?/archives/18-Functional-languages-
> > > will-rule.html
> > >
> > > http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/08/01.html
> > > http://www.developerdotstar.com/community/node/544
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think the best approach would be to find a way to gain the
> > > advantages of functional based programming while keeping the
easy-to-
> > > understand OOP metaphor.
> > >
> > >
> > > Is Actionscript ideally suited for functional programming?
> > >
> > > Can someone give/point me to some examples?
> > >
> > > Thanks again
> > > Jim Bachalo
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
> > > To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
> > >
> > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> > > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> > > http://www.figleaf.com
> > > http://training.figleaf.com
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
> > To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
> >
> > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> > http://www.figleaf.com
> > http://training.figleaf.com
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
