One of co-authors of the Real World Haskell book, John Goerzen, talks in a recent interview to O’Reilly about purity, laziness, recursiveness and many other subjects that make Haskell worth learning but may also be a source of reluctance for people coming from object oriented or imperative programming.
In the beginning of last year, Ehud Lamm launched on Lamba the Ultimate a thread about programming languages predictions for 2008. Several subjects popped up: concurrency, functional programming, future of Java, Ruby, C++, and many others… What really happened in 2008 and what are the prospects for 2009? Bloggers have addressed these questions on demand of James Iry, echoing at last year thread.
In this interview filmed during QCon London 2008, Ted Neward, author of "Effective Enterprise Java", talks about languages, statical, dynamical, objectual or functional. He dives into Java, C#, C++, Haskell, Scala, VB, and Lisp, to name some of them, comparing the benefits and disadvantages of using one or another.
In this QCon London 2008 interview, computer scientist and researcher Simon Peyton Jones discusses properties of functional programming languages, and particularly Haskell, that have inspired some features in mainstream languages. He gives his opinion on the issues of syntax and language complexity and talks about some research work on subjects such as data parallelism and transactional memory.
In quest for more power, languages are often grown with new features. While it provides programmer with more freedom, does this actually achieve more power? Reg Braithwaite believes that this is not necessarily true and argues that it is possible to render language more powerful yet limiting options offered to programmers.
In his latest blog post, Michael Feathers argued that object oriented programming languages offer some built-in features that facilitate testing and are therefore more recovery friendly than functional languages. Proponents of functional languages expressed strong disagreement with this statement, which provoked a very passionate debate in the blog community.
Designing for flexibility and robustness: Asynchronous message model, OOP and Functional Programming
According to Pragmatic Programmers it is preferable in OOP to avoid design based on returning values. Michael Feathers argues that it may also be better to use the asynchronous message model that might be instrumental for improving adaptability and robustness. This maps well to the Erlang model though opposing some of the principles of pure functional programming.
Now that Ruby holds no secrets from him, Antonio Cangiano explains why and how Haskell will satisfy his passion for language learning.