Functional Programming Isn't Just for Academics: Why It Matters for the Systems We Build Now
Briefly

Functional Programming Isn't Just for Academics: Why It Matters for the Systems We Build Now
"In 1983 I asked my parents for an Atari for Christmas, instead I got a Commodore 64... Needless to say, I was very disappointed until I discovered how much cooler Wizard of Wor was than Combat. To their credit, my parents thought a computer was a better investment than a video game. I used that C64 through my sophomore year of college until I replaced it with a 486; my first real investment."
"So, like many in my generation, I cut my teeth on programming languages like BASIC and LOGO without really picking them for any reason. It was just kind of cool, as a kid, to be able to tell a computer what to do and watch it do it. I quickly understood that animating ASCII stick figures was a BASIC problem and digital Spirograph was a job for the LOGO turtle."
A Commodore 64 replaced an expected Atari, prompting discovery of more satisfying games and extended personal use until upgrade to a 486. Early hands-on experience with BASIC and LOGO taught that specific languages suit particular creative tasks. College practice split languages by domain, with FORTran applied to math and science and C used for general purposes. Subsequent formal study introduced procedural, object-oriented, logic, and functional paradigms; Pascal emphasized rigor, Smalltalk fostered object-oriented thinking, Prolog demonstrated logic programming, and Scheme profoundly influenced programming approach. Broad exposure to languages expanded comprehension and creative boundaries beyond single-language limits.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]