Nothing wrong with classes in functional programming though. Just return a new instance of the class from your method, rather than mutating an existing instance.
Right, I think the two aren’t as different as they appear. You can think of a closure as an object with just one method.
If OO programming is fundamentally about objects sending messages to each other, then there are many ways to approach that. Some of those ways are totally compatible with functional programming.
The legacy of C++ has dominated what OOP is “supposed” to be, but it doesn’t have to work like that.
Nothing wrong with classes in functional programming though. Just return a new instance of the class from your method, rather than mutating an existing instance.
Classes are just another way to define an object. Heck even Lisp has objects!
Javascript:
I heard you like mutating class data so I’m mutating the data you can put in your class data, dawg.
JavaScript: a language for mutants.
Right, I think the two aren’t as different as they appear. You can think of a closure as an object with just one method.
If OO programming is fundamentally about objects sending messages to each other, then there are many ways to approach that. Some of those ways are totally compatible with functional programming.
The legacy of C++ has dominated what OOP is “supposed” to be, but it doesn’t have to work like that.