He is a bit of a “rebel for the static strongly typed pure functional cause” - and even though he makes some good arguments that isn’t going to stop me from referring to work like that from Pierre-Yves Saumont if I should find myself trapped in Java-land (for whatever reason) anytime in the future.
I would argue that “functional tactics” in imperative languages are ultimately more effectively wielded by developers with experience with “real functional languages” - but never(, ever, and not even close) to the full effect and impact of actually using a “real functional language” for the task at hand (which ultimately is one of the points that Erik Meijer is making).
[quote=“mkunikow, post:20, topic:1771”]
You will always need to deal with state and side effects. But there should be clear separation in code: pure functions vs rest.[/quote]
In the Clojure community it is often said that good functional design “pushes the [impure aspects] to the edges of the system”‡ - leaving the core logic pure and minimally “complected”.
‡I seem to recall David Nolen using that phrase fairly regularly in his communications.
