Hacker News Reader

Not really.

Functional programming for me has a feeling of a mathematically sound foundation: This means a statically typed language with a powerful type-system and type inference. Immutability/effect system are a big plus. Broad range of data-structures and a decent object system are nice, too.

View on HN

> Functional programming for me has a feeling of a mathematically sound foundation: This means a statically typed language with a powerful type-system and type inference.

Mathematical soundness does not require type inference. It's unclear whether it requires static typing.

And, it can easily get by with almost no type-system.

That's why I wrote "for me".

I have no idea why you think statically typed languages have anything to do with Functional programming.

That's my second sentence.

Looks like everyone ignored that bit where I said there was no point arguing over it :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com