Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!samsung!usc!chaph.usc.edu!usc.edu!news
From: news@usc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: The name of the game
Message-ID: <9108@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 14 Apr 90 22:47:12 GMT
References: <1818@majestix.ida.liu.se>
Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 21
In-reply-to: JWC@IDA.LiU.SE's message of 14 Apr 90 22:02:03 GMT

In article <1818@majestix.ida.liu.se> JWC@IDA.LiU.SE (Jonas Wallgren) writes:
>  What is a functional language?

>  There are two main properties:
>	   1: No assignments, no side effects, referential transparency,
>	      or whatever you call it.
>	   2: Higher order functions.

Another question or two:   Would a language subset (limit language use
to those parts which conform to these properties) be considered a
functional language?

Also, wouldn't it be more accurate to say "no reassignments"?  or is
there a serious distinction made between function definition and value
assignments??

Perhaps one should make a distinction between the operating system
(where values and functions can be defined) and the functional
language (where everything is all nice and neat)?  Discussions of the
os go to other newsgroups, but a language which is a mix, such as
lisp, apl, or smalltalk should have a 'functional language subset'.