Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

this is orthogonal to the issue of “declarative versus imperative”

Wait, you're saying that I could make an imperative results-oriented language as easily as a declarative one? Perhaps the author meant "is not identical to" rather than "orthogonal"?



I did mean orthogonal, though the difference between a declarative result-oriented language and an imperative one is perhaps not immediately apparent. In an imperative result-oriented language, sequence would become less significant—as in a declarative language—but imperative operations would still be allowed, because sometimes “what you mean” is fundamentally imperative.


Your "results oriented" is what everyone else means by "declarative". It is true that functional and logic programming are not fully declarative because you end up having to worry about the way your declarations will be evaluated, but the same issue will apply to your language. That's what you swept under the rug in your remark along the lines of "if we're careful what constraints we choose, we can get a good running time."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: