good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
for run time speed use FP (functional programming) Huh? Functional programming tends to be pretty expensive in terms of memory and arguably slower than a more procedural style (depending on whether your language of choice does tail-call optimization). Side effect-free programming with lots of first-class functions, closures, and lambdas floating around isn't easy to optimize. The traditional check-box feature of functional programming is implementation speed. (On the other hand, ghc can produce some damn fast code; on the gripping hand, gcc can beat ghc pretty handily. IME, of course.) Functional programming techniques make some faster algorithms easier to write (divide and conquer, for instance; languages with lazy lists make dynamic programming absurdly easy). That's not necessarily the same thing, though. Maybe by "functional" programming you mean "procedural"? -- In reply to Re^2: To use or not to use OO Perl
by FoxtrotUniform
|
|