i mean, then we get into defining multi-paradigm :P does it have objects that could, theoretically, be used in a java-like object oriented system? yes! does anybody do that? not really! it's far more functional than any other paradigm, and that's what counts.

blueberry87

·2 tahun yang lalu·discuss

this is wrong! ocaml is a functional programming language with side effects.

blueberry87

·2 tahun yang lalu·discuss

annoyingly go can't have proper sum types, as the requirement for a default value for everything doesn't make any sense for sum types

blueberry87

·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss

that's not how compile time works buddy

blueberry87

·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss

You lose a very large amount of expressive power if you don't. Any formalisation of the reals requires at least 3 levels, if I remember correctly.

blueberry87

·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss

What are your other options? A type-based proof system implies dependent types, implies universe levels if you want it to be consistent.

blueberry87

·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss

Trying to compare a switch statement to proper pattern matching is like comparing a rock to a rocket.

blueberry87

·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss

Also agda: https://plfa.github.io/