May be there are many less FP solutions than OOP solutions just because
there are many less FP problems than OOP problems.

Or may be i am plain naive, who knows...

- damien


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Morelli" <morelli@cs.utah.edu>
To: "Kyle Consalus" <consalus@gmail.com>
Cc: <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] (Mostly) Functional Design?


> I've been lurking on this list for several years.  This seems as good a
> time as any to delurk and jump on a soap box.
>
> I think you've put your finger on one of the main reasons functional
> languages have failed to attract significant use beyond a few niche
> areas.
>
> I contend:
>    1.  The FP community tends to emphasize low level issues rather than
> the larger scale issues that concern most programmers.  It is also
> inept at practical documentation and advocacy.
>    2.  There isn't much of a theory of large scale functional design.
> At least,  there is no consensus.
>    3.  Point 2. is not the consequence of point 1.;  it's not simply a
> matter of communication,  but an instrinsic void in the FP paradigm.
> The FP paradigm is intrinsically poorly adapted to the kind of large
> scale design concepts that concern most programmers.  Object oriented
> programming is a much better match,  not because of a conspiracy of
> commercial giants in the software tool business,  but because of
> intrinsic technical reasons.  Functional programming is a niche
> technology ideally suited to simple domains like language tools and
> formal methods.  It does not have much to say about complicated
> systems.
>
>
> Kyle Consalus wrote:
> > There are a wealth of resources related to object oriented design
techniques
> > (which can certainly be applied to OCaml), but I've been pretty much
unable
> > to find any good resources on large scale design of functional programs.
> > I realize that this is the sort of thing that develops over time with
> > experience.
> > Just the same, there is (most likely) a lot to learn and consider, and a
> > resource would be helpful. My recent uses of OCaml for fairly small
projects
> > have been effective, but a lot of things were cumbersome in the design
> > and I suspect that I may be thinking about it wrong.
> > So, could anyone suggest a good resource or perhaps weigh
> > in on their thoughts on the topic?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Kyle
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>