I'm intrigued that Python has some functional constructions in the language.

[pruebauno at latinmail.com]

On May 8, 3:04 pm, Casey Hawthorne <caseyhHAMMER_T... at istar.ca> wrote:
> I'm intrigued that Python has some functional constructions in the
> language.
>
> Would it be possible to more clearly separate the pure code (without
> side effects) from the impure code (that deals with state changes,
> I/O, etc.), so that the pure code could be compiled and have
> aggressive functional transformations applied to it for efficiency.
>
> That way, the syntax would be a lot easier to understand, than most
> functional languages, like Haskell.
>
> I gave a presentation at the beginning of last year on Haskell and at
> the end, someone's comment was, "I can see the benefits of functional
> programming but why does it have to be so cryptic."
> --
> Regards,
> Casey

Don't forget that the Python interpreter is simple. It makes
maintenance easier and allows embedding it into other programs. Good
optimizing compilers for functional languages are not simple. Your
idea would be something that could be added to the PyPy project in the
future.