![]() ![]() Ok, I agree, this is really artificial but I prefer to show you this example rather than the classical Fibonacci series example (multiple examples out there). Imagine the situation in which we have an expensive function that is called many times with similar arguments at different stages of our program. When one has a function that will produce the same output based on the same inputs it is likely that one wants to have a way to cache the output so you can perform faster. Here we are going to review the next functional dosing patterns: I mention this because it does not matter if you are pure functional or pure OOP or pure procedural, the patterns that we are going to review here could be useful for you in all the paradigms, but in functional probably they will be a must. I am closer to OOP in my daily life but there are situations in which a functional approach could help to describe the code and simplify the task for the whole team. There are still problems that happen in several contexts and could be solved applying the same "solution" or pattern. that there is no need for design patterns? It depends on your vision, but I would say that of course there is still room for patterns. The topic itself is more deep than this, so you can learn more about it here.ĭoes this mean that just by this shift of paradigm there are no similar problems that could be solved in a regular way, i.e. So no objects, no classes, just functions. ![]() In general words, the functional programming paradigm focuses on the concatenation of pure functions to achieve a desired output by promoting immutability on the data and no side effects during the process. For those of you who do not know about this paradigm I recommend you the HOW TO section on the topic from the Standard Library. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |