444 reputation
57
bio website
location Ottawa, Canada
age 39
visits member for 3 years, 10 months
seen Dec 20 '13 at 21:10

Jan
29
comment Using “off-paradigm” coding practices in an existing codebase
True ... I'd argue that functional programs (well, purely functional) are less maintenance in the short and long term anyways as they have no bugs due to side-effects, and if you eliminate nulls, no bugs due to null reference exceptions.
Nov
4
comment Will .NET 4.5 Make the Reactive Extensions Obsolete?
@RobertHarvey Although that video is still valuable and informative, channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/… goes over the integration with .NET 4.5 and is more up to date with the latest version.
Jun
16
comment How do I create my own programming language and a compiler for it
I was going to suggest this myself ... for the lazy, check out the 10-minute intro: From NAND to Tetris in 12 Steps @ youtube.com/watch?v=JtXvUoPx4Qs
May
20
comment Why the current enthusiasm for Functional Programming?
@Job, See blogs.msdn.com/b/wesdyer/archive/2008/01/11/… as referenced in the comment above.
Nov
22
comment Why the current enthusiasm for Functional Programming?
@Stefan: It sounds somewhat accurate to say the lambda sees it's environment, but I'm not 100% clear on that, so I hesitate to answer until I learn more myself. However, I can say with 100% certainty, that LINQ is monads, because the creators have said so on many occasions. SelectMany is exactly equivalent to Bind in Haskell. If you haven't read "The Marvels of Monads" (blogs.msdn.com/b/wesdyer/archive/2008/01/11/…) I highly recommend it ... it'll reveal how LINQ is really monads. Cheers.