Why won't Pajeets just abandon Java even after realizing OOP is obsolete?
>>54479990
Why wont /pol/ stfu and go back to wanking to his little girls drawings?
>>54479990
Functional programming is a hippie academia meme.
OOP isn't obsolete because it allows you to encapsulate business logic within an object model using design patterns. It's literally the industry standard for all enterprise software out there.
Also, yes Java sucks. I do Object Pascal.
>>54480026
>Also, yes Java sucks. I do Object Pajeet.
fify ;^)
>>54480026
Professional dev here, this is mostly wrong
First off, it's not a meme. Being at least able to pass functions around is just as useful as passing objects or variables around. Cutting out any one of them means you will find it harder to express certain constructs. At the very, very least, if your language doesn't have map, reduce, filter, etc, it's not a usable language
OOP may not be obsolete, but most of it is a meme, especially encapsulation.
>>54480096
But Java 8 have map, reduce, filter.
>>54480060
I've never met a single pajeet who knew Pascal. They simply aren't taught that.
Also no SJWs because it's not a fad language like Ruby or Python.
Pascal is literally the perfect language.
>>54480096
>professional dev here
What do you think I am, you retard?
>it's not a meme
Yes it is, I've never seen corporate use of it. It's an obfuscated way to program pushed by know-it-alls with PhDs in universities.
>able to pass functions around
That's what methods are for. But if you can't pass data around tied to them, and change their behaviour on the fly like in OOP, then you can't do shit.
>map, reduce, filter
Pascal has neither, and none of us have ever missed it.
>encapsulation is a meme
Wanna know how I can tell you're not really a professional developer?
>>/pol\>
>>54480003
That's /r9k/ you newfag.
>>54480174
I know, I wasn't attacking Java
>>54480177
>What do you think I am, you retard?
Either not a professional, or using backwards coding style to accommodate lack of functional functionality
>Yes it is, I've never seen corporate use of it.
You can say >webdev if you want, but everything JS is pretty much functional programming, barring angular. Its 'objects' are just dicts that you use in place of typical functional language's lists. I do webdev professionally and at least half the code is functional
>That's what methods are for. But if you can't pass data around tied to them, and change their behaviour on the fly like in OOP, then you can't do shit.
Nonsensical answer given my question
>Pascal has neither, and none of us have ever missed it.
Meme language
>Wanna know how I can tell you're not really a professional developer?
I am
>>54479990
>functional programming in Java
>>54480177
>I've never seen corporate use of it
https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry
>>54479990
As soon as you stop hiring them
>>54480254
>Pascal is a meme language
While you're writing little web gadgets in fad languages that won't be used at all in 10 years, I'm writing mission critical back-end ERP shit that will run on a mainframe for the next 20. And 0 of it is functional. Stay rectally frustrated.
>>54480292
Haskell is literally 28 positions behind Pascal on the TIOBE rankings. It less popular even than useless shit like D, Lisp, Scala and even F#.
>>54480177
Pascal is a teaching/learning language. I used it in high school in 1995.
Java Lambdas just fuck my shit up man
>>54480364
>While you're writing little web gadgets in fad languages that won't be used at all in 10 years,
Better than being in your boring position of being technologically behind
>Haskell is literally 28 positions behind Pascal on the TIOBE rankings.
Not him, but languages that push functional programming style are still used widely in the industry no matter what kind of meme rankings you pull up
>>54480364
>Haskell is literally 28 positions behind Pascal on the TIOBE rankings
So? It doesn't make you any less wrong about functional programming being used in corporate environments; stop trying to move the goalposts.
>>54480448
You're the one moving the goalposts. I said I've never seen corporate use of it. And I've been doing this for over a decade. That's 100% true. I never said anything wrong, scroll up the thread and check.
>>54480539
>actually telling the other anon you live in a technological closed box
Not even sure how you enjoy browsing /g/ when we're pretty open to up and coming new technology
>>54480567
Functional programming is not new, and Haskell is older than Java. If it hasn't caught up by now, that should tell you something.
>>54480599
Didn't even imply Haskell is new, just that you live in a technological bubble, and /g/ is about not being in one
>>54480539
You said functional programming is a meme because you have never seen corporate use of it, upon being shown corporate use you tried moving the goalposts (which was ANY corporate use) to popularity.
Maybe if you weren't busy being so defensive you wouldn't have needed it spelt out to you.
>>54479990
>Pajeets in the tech industry again
America in a nutshell. how many designated streets do you guys have already?
>>54480177
>I've never met a single pajeet who knew Pascal
I've never met a single pajeet
>>54480096
>At the very, very least, if your language doesn't have map, reduce, filter, etc, it's not a usable language
>Java had none of these prior to version 8 yet it's been the most widely used language in enterprise for nearly 2 decades.
Seemed quite usable to me. I think functional vs object oriented programming is just an autistic preference. All that matters in the end is the finished product, damn whatever was used to develop it.
>tfw javascript is merging the best of OOP and FP
5 more years and every other general purpose language will be obsolete.
>>54480721
>Java had none of these prior to version 8 yet it's been the most widely used language in enterprise for nearly 2 decades.
You'd be surprised what a Pajeet can do with shit
>>54480096
>Being at least able to pass functions around
"Functions" are just objects with specific methods. Java 1 already allowed this. This has been part of OOP since Simula 67 and Smalltalk.
Look at Scala: functions are syntactic sugar for objects with an apply method. Pattern matching calls a method on an object. It just has more concise syntax. All of the functional stuff is syntactic sugar for OO because an OO core is more powerful.
>>54480174
Java 8 didn't add anything that older Java couldn't already do. It's just syntactic sugar.
>>54480729
Just like Smalltalk and Self. The "best of FP" has been part of OOP since the beginning.
>>54480737
>implying anyone in enterprise gave a shit about fp back then
>implying India had computers back then
>implying you aren't posting on a pajeetOS phone right now.
>>54480755
>Just like Smalltalk and Self. The "best of FP" has been part of OOP since the beginning.
except people actually use js
>>54480789
Not disagreeing, but people use Python and Ruby too and they also contain the "best of FP."(lambda x: x + 1).__call__(4)
Functions are objects.
>>54479990
some wannabe college kids trying to express their feelings towards sjw programming languages lately here
Java is the king of all languages for making things work on every single platform
>>54479990
Java's not actually a bad language, and the JVM is actually quite a nice platform. It's just popular in the programming industry because the verbosity makes it easy for large teams who may not be communicating with each other, or are constantly cycling members in and out, to work together without breaking each other's shit. Because it's popular in the programming industry, it gets used a lot by "Muh Enterprise" programmers and beginners. Because it's used by "Muh Enterprise" programmers and beginners, /g/ thinks it must be dumb.
>>54480660
You sound frustrated. Why are you so mad that almost nobody seriously uses your favourite meme language?
Most gentle introduction to functional programming for a Java / C developer?
The closest I have gotten to FP is I've played around with Rust a little.
>>54480717
Lucky you.
>>54481085
You sound defensive lmao
>>54481091
Learn you a Haskell for great good
>>54481105
So much damage control.
But I like making instances of objects sometimes
>>54481120
I agree, TurboPascal memer turned out to be a turboautist lmao
>>54481128
>muh object model
>muh listeners
I want to get off this ride.
>>54481158
Stop appending lmao to all your messages and you might stop giving away so hard that you're sweating nervous.
>>54481091
The Little Schemer starts off very gently, and deals with functional programming (but not exclusively). Scheme is a much easier language to learn on its own than other languages used for functional proramming (i.e., Haskell and the like) because of the straightforward syntax and evaluation rules. There's also HTDP, but that's geared more towards absolute beginners in programming.
Functional programming isn't very difficult. Functions take input, and create new output by performing computations on the input data without modifying exterior state. Functional programming usually involves higher-order functions, which are just functions that can take other functions as input and potentially return other functions.
>>54480096
Sounds like you work at McDonald's
>>54481199
lmao so mad
>>54481243
lmao shut the fuck up lmao
>>54480755
>Java 8 didn't add anything that older Java couldn't already do. It's just syntactic sugar
Yep and modern programming doesnt add anything that you couldn't do in asm. Its all just syntactical sugar.
>>54481289
theoretically you could program everything and anything in machine code
When your life is so shitty that streets are lined with poop java probably offers a slightly nicer hell.
>>54481331
Exactly what I said.
>>54480060
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>>54481289
It's local syntactic sugar. If Java had a C preprocessor, you could literally#define lambda(...) ...and be able to write "lambdas" without changing anything else in the program.
The type inference and library functions are new in Java 8, but the full lambda calculus was there since Java 1.
If you don't understand the difference between that and a compiler, you should learn more about CS and programming languages.
>>54481342
>>54481331
Yes the syntactic sugar makes the language. Anyy Turing complete data manipulation system is equivalent. It is the ease with which to do said manipulations through syntax and design patterns that is worth discussing.
Very roughly speaking, functional programming (“FP”) and object-oriented programming (“OOP”) have similar levels of expressive power and similar abilities to encapsulate programs into smaller parts that can be combined and recombined.
The biggest difference between the two “schools of thought” concerns the relationship between data and operations on the data.
The central tenet of OOP is that data and the operations upon it are tightly coupled: An object owns its data and it owns the implementation of the operations on the data. It hides those from other objects via its interface, a collection of methods or messages it responds to. Thus, the central model for abstraction is the data itself, hidden as it is behind a small API in the form of its interface.
The central activity in OOP is composing new objects and extending existing objects by adding new methods to them.
The central tenet of FP is that data is only loosely coupled to functions. You can write different operations on the same data structure, and the central model for abstraction is the function, not the data structure. Functions hide their implementation, and the language’s abstractions speak to functions and they way they are combined or expressed, such as generic functions or combinators.
>>54480947
>every platform
>only Windows, Mac OS X, GNU/Linux, and Solaris
>every
The idea that Java is portable and cross-platform is a lie.
>>54480905
nice try pyfag. your language looks like shit and functions aren't supposed to be objects.(x => x+1)(4)
>>54481289
>>54480755
He is right, though. The lambdas in Java are just shortened anonymous class instantiations.
>>54480755
>"Functions" are just objects with specific methods.
>OOP
>Smalltalk
lol dont get Smalltalk mixed up with your idiotic OOP and semantics.
>>54482997
It may surprise you to learn that design patterns were first invented for Smalltalk.
>>54483902
(Design patterns are such an old mistake so why do they still exist?
>>54481274
Lmao
>>54479990
all the pajeets i work with are .NET developers though
>>54480383
It's pretty based though.
