Re: F# fsharp
Lionel Barret De Nazaris <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.devel.sweng |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Compiler & Parsers are indeed a good fit for functional languages. By the way, IIRC, you can mix F# and C#. So more experienced programmer can get the benefits of F# without waiting for the whole team to get it. On 05/25/2010 11:26 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Lionel Barret De Nazaris > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It depends on how you present the language. >> >> Functional languages presented as graphs can be grasped quite easily : node >> being functions, etc. >> > I suppose F# would induce head scratching among non-programmers... or > even a lot of programmers, until they get used to it. On the other > hand, one could use F# to define a Domain Specific Language that dumbs > things down however one likes. I guess that's using F# as a language > toolbox rather than a straight off-the-shelf language. Eh, everyone's > doing programmable GPUs nowadays, why not programmable languages. Or > even programmable languages to define languages for GPUs, considering > how limited GPU languages are. > > > Cheers, > Brandon Van Every > _______________________________________________ > Sweng-Gamedev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com > -- Best regards, Lionel Barret de Nazaris Gamr7 - CEO === Create bigger cities faster with Urban PAD <http://gamr7.com/g2009/urban_pad>. follow us : rss <http://gamr7.com/g2009/default/feed.rss>, twitter <http://twitter.com/Gamr7>, facebook <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Urban-PAD/124363971359> _______________________________________________ Sweng-Gamedev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com