probably because I misunderstand functional programming. Much more interesting question would be your opinion of using coupling/cohesion typologies as metaphors in realms outside of programming.
davew On Tue, Aug 18, 2020, at 8:59 AM, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote: > I agree completely. But FP also agrees. So it's unclear to me why you > think anyone enamored of it would disagree. I think it's fair to say > that the whole point of FP is to make focusing on behavior a *safe* > thing to do. But to be clear, I'm not enamored with FP. It's a tool > like any other, apt in some circumstances, abusive in others. Those who > would trade expressiveness for safety deserve neither. > > On 8/17/20 7:36 PM, Prof David West wrote: > > *[The following sentence is just to annoy glen and jon, who, I believe, are > > enamored of functional programming.]* > > > > /Of course, personally, I think all of this is nonsense and that the only > > criteria that should be used to decompose complex systems or to design > > programming modules, is //_behavior_//./ > > > > *[End trolling]* > > -- > ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
