Yeah sorry i wasn't bringing much by commenting this above. And yeah lisp was the historical soil for FP (schemers took the lead on this).
Yeah sorry i wasn't bringing much by commenting this above. And yeah lisp was the historical soil for FP (schemers took the lead on this).
No I think your point is good, it just wasn't contradictory and I think that was your intent. Defining FP is a dark art :)
maybe FP should be explained as `rules not values`. in scheme it's common to negate the function to be applied, or curry some expression or partially compose / thread rules/logic to get a potential future value that did nothing yet
I like it. I think I said this in a separate post in here but I've taken to breaking it down to different archetypes and discussing them separately.