From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b3f07bd1ad77d438
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.78.MISMATCH!feeder.news-service.com!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: The state of functional programming
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:52:31 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Xns9DC56475222B1WarrensBlatherings@81.169.183.62>
References: 
 <2adc4d8d-210e-429c-8188-9b1e99c2718e@d17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <g24nvegdi17t$.1azxwn1rwjixi$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Xns9DC39A29C4AD7WarrensBlatherings@85.214.73.210>
 <1oubrlamjqe8q$.bdwkb9i7ys6b$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Xns9DC47362DB91WarrensBlatherings@85.214.73.210>
 <a3iznu9uq49d$.1m9cupr81yhut$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Xns9DC49BF262AB5WarrensBlatherings@81.169.183.62>
 <8be7luFbvaU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:52:31 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx01.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="9f8M0iN5t54V+4DF/iqO8g";
	logging-data="31616"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19DTPJgn+V3UVIwekllWbCt93mb7OKdZQM="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Face: 
 &6@]C2>ZS=NM|HE-^zWuryN#Z/2_.s9E|G&~DRi|sav9{E}XQJb*\_>=a5"q]\%A;5}LKP][1mA{gZ,Q!j
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6UG3jNoBam0QvZo3cPYK2zvc2mI=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12719
Date: 2010-07-30T13:52:31+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Niklas Holsti expounded in news:8be7luFbvaU1@mid.individual.net:
> Warren wrote:
>> In a non-FP language (Ada), you can solve _any_ problem so long
>> as you code it (you are coding the "how").  IOW, you have
>> solved the problem and specified it in code.
>> 
>> In FP, you define the "problem" (instead) and require from 
>> it a solution. But FP cannot always solve that "problem".
> 
> Warren, I think your description or understanding of FP matches "logic 
> programming" or "constraint programming" rather than "functional 
> programming".

Now that you mention the words "logic programming", I feel
a twinge in the back of my mind..

> It is in logic programming and constraint programming that the 
> programmer enters facts, rules, and a goal, and the program searches 
for 
> solutions (proofs or realisations of the goal) in some way that is not 
> explicitly encoded in the program.

I did start off with "if I understand correctly" - obviously
I mixed these up!  This is _exactly_ what I was discussing.

The problem with age is the ever increasing number of memory
parity errors that go uncorrected. ;-)

Apologies to the thread for the confusion.

Warren