Functional Code is ShorterReason #6 to Learn Functional Programming
You may have heard it before, but I'll say it again: Functional code tends to be shorter than equivalent code in non-functional languages. See this paper about a project at Erlang and their estimates of how much shorter it is than an equivalent C++ program. Spoiler: C++ is between 4 and 10 times longer than Erlang. Here is a quote:
Some concrete comparisons of source code volume have been made, as applications written in C++ have been rewritten in Erlang, resulting in a ten-fold reduction in the number of lines of uncommented source code. Other comparisons have indicated a fourfold reduction. A reasonable conclusion is that productivity increases by the same factor, given the same line/hour programmer productivity.
When measuring product quality in number of reported errors per 1000 lines of source code, the same relationship seems to exist: similar error density, but given the difference in code volume, roughly 4-10 times fewer errors in Erlang-based products.
You should learn functional programming. I'll give you many reasons, but this is just one. Reason #6 is that functional code is shorter.
If you want to learn functional programming, sign up for the Functional Programming Career Guide below.
If you liked this video, please share:
- Moving Average in Lodash
- Why Functional Programming?
- Functional Programming Embodies Good Software Practices
- Functional Programming Makes Concurrency Easier
- Functional Programming has a Long and Storied History
- Functional Code is Simple
- You Will Learn Monads
- Functional Programming Makes You Look Smart
- Two Ways are Better than One
- Functional Programming is Growing
Eric Normand loves functional programming. He wants to help you thrive. He is the Chief Instigator and Fearless Leader of PurelyFunctional.tv.