[Haskell-cafe] Game of life in haskell.
jon at ffconsultancy.com
Tue Feb 2 22:11:34 EST 2010
On Tuesday 02 February 2010 18:44:25 David Leimbach wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> > I meant the scalability and speed. An imperative solution should be
> > simpler, more scalable and faster than any purely functional solution.
> That's a pretty strange comment. Why do you think an imperative solution
> is simpler, faster and more scalable?
Mutation can avoid lots of unnecessary allocations and indirections with
minimal risk of error in this case.
> If functional programming can't provide any one of those, it's not worth
I doubt programming paradigms live or die according to whether or not they can
implement Conway's Game of Life simply and efficiently.
> and based on the membership in this list, the interest in it
> these days, and the fact that I've seen many occasions where functional
> programming lends itself to a faster implementation (in terms of time to
> implement and test) that's actually readable sooner than a lot of
> imperative approaches...
Of Conway's Game of Life?
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe