Browse thread
(Mostly) Functional Design?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2005-07-24 (18:30) |
From: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Some Clarifications |
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 02:08 -0600, Robert Morelli wrote: > but I primarily raised that point to underline that I believe > the lack of a "theory" of large scale design issues is not a result of > it. Well, in my opinion, there is no 'theory' of large scale design for Object Orientation, whilst there IS a theory for functional programming. Attempts have been made to develop OO theory, but the result primarily discredits OO, rather than supporting it: the so-called 'covariance problem' basically destroys class based (statically typed) object orientation as a paradigm. On the other hand, functional people DO have a well founded, elegant, long standing theoretical framework. Perhaps I might agree that Lambda Calculus is a low level theory .. but I am referring instead to a theory of abstraction at all levels: namely, Category Theory. CT subsumes lambda calculus, it has provided the inspiration for the ML language family module system, and the fundamental data types: tuples/records, variants, and of course function closures. -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sourceforge dot net>