On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Rico Moorman <rico.moor...@gmail.com>wrote:
> We should first examine the merits and limitations of the traditional >> approach: using >> functions as a basis for the architecture of software systems. This will >> not only lead us to >> > > Because you both have more experience with this piece of literature, how > would you interpret it? With a grain of salt or would function really mean > procedure from the viewpoint of the author? > "Procedures". They're coming at it from the standpoint of C / Algol / Pascal, where "functions" are more or less your only real way to organize code; not talking about functional programming. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
