Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

MVC, Desktop Clients, & WPF

Christopher Bennage — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 06:55:52 GMT

I've spent the majority of my career as a Web developer, and I've only recently (with the discovery of

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

wesdyer — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 02:25:27 GMT

I was told that it would be fairly difficult to organize such a site; however, I was also told that we'd be happy to host articles and provide links to FP related things on the C# site. You can contact Charlie Calvert if you have something. His blog is at: http://blogs.msdn.com/charlie.

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

wesdyer — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:29:37 GMT

Joost:

You can't do that today, but I'd love to add support for that.

Tom:

I forwarded your request on to the people who could organize that. Thanks for the suggestion.

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

Joost Morsink — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:58:20 GMT

Tom: I agree :)

Would MS consider hosting a FP Community site?

Tom Kirby-Green — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 09:14:01 GMT

Wes,

Would Microsoft consider hosting a FP community site? It seems clear that there's a real interest and hunger in the community for this stuff. The responses to your own posts show that the existing FP community has a considerable body of experience and insight to offer and are now coming out of the woodwork given the tentative steps C# 3 is making in this direction.

What I'm suggesting is some central place where we can hang out, with links to your blog, HubFS, Lambda The Ultimate etc, Iron Python. The remit would be FP on .NET.

Perhaps a sub-section of Channel 9, but I was really thinking of something like Coding For Fun in terms of having its own identity.

Would Microsoft consider putting some resource behind this?

Kind regards,

tom

Quicksort in C#, Ruby, Haskell e LINQ

Il Blog di Antonio Cangiano — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 08:53:47 GMT

Il sottotitolo di questo blog ora appare come Pensieri eretici nel mondo .NET . Ho deciso di rinominarlo

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

Joost Morsink — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 12:17:53 GMT

Yeah type classes, that's exactly what I want. Too bad it isn;t going to be in the next release. I guess I'd better head back to Reflection :). But seriously I could write some interface transformer extension methods. In my example like:

static IMonad<A> ToMonad(this IList<A> l);

which brings me to my next question: Can I implement a preferably implicit, but otherwise explicit cast/conversion operator as an extension method, so when coding, it does look like it has the new type, but it really doesn't?

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

Sadek Drobi — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 03:05:27 GMT

But you do visit arguments, so why to visit arguments and not paramters, anyway thats not a big deal as i can override the methods.

I would really like to revisit all the everyday's patterns and think about them in an immutable implementation, maybe it will work for some, i like the new horizon a mixed language like c# offers.

re: Immutability, Purity, and Referential Transparency

wesdyer — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 01:16:09 GMT

Sadek:

1. We don't visit the parameters because they are not part of the body of the lambda.

2. We wanted to expose it, but we were very short on resources so this feature was cut. We may expose it in a sample.

The Essence Of Good Code

DonXml's All Things Techie — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 23:32:09 GMT

In my recent Syntactic Sugar presentation I was trying to get to the essence of good code, and come up