This is all language astronauts. There's nowt wrong with the for loop for most cases I can think of.
Closures are way more expensive if you include the call overhead.
Closures are way more expensive if you include the call overhead.
There is something wrong with a for loop, just like there is something wrong with goto--it's at too low a level of abstraction. A goto could signify any sort of jump; a for signifies any sort of repeated operation. A fold or a map or a filter or a zip signifies a very specific type of repeated operation that is hard to mess up.
I get the feeling a lot of people on HN just fell out of university or work in a niche area. The rest of us don't care for such isolation and prefer to work with deterministic and well known tooling.
<sarcasm>
If that is the case, then the summation operator in mathematics should be replaced with Lambda Calculus or the world will fall apart...
Linux obviously doesn't work because it uses for loops in the Kernel.
Windows needs to be rewritten in Haskell or LISP to make it pure.
OMG I just realised, I'm not allowed to walk a list in C without implementing car and struct pair. Damn my stack just blew.
</sarcasm>