[mirekrusin]

It should be clarified that the whole thing is about functional patterns in Clojure that are expressing same functionality as well known OO patterns in Java.

Adding "it's just..." in front of functional patterns doesn't make them non-patterns.

Patterns are named ideas on how to approach/solve similar problems.

They are not tied to OO programming, Java, they are not good or bad per-se; it's just a cookbook with recipes that have names.

Otherwise nice format, I like it.

[catnaroek]

Presumably the point is that most functional programmers wouldn't have bothered giving dedicated names to, say, “strategies” or “factories”, more or less the same way nobody would bother calling “(a + b) / 2” the “average pattern”.

[geezerjay]

> nobody would bother calling “(a + b) / 2” the “average pattern”.

don't you mean.... the arithmetic mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic_mean

Oh my god, and people bother themselves calling the addition o sequences of numbers as summation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summation

Where does this madness end? These morons even bothered themselves forming whole fields in mathematics by studying adding numbers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_(mathematics)

Why is humanity so wrong about such a simple concept? Why is everyone bothered to give dedicated names to concepts you fail to understand?

[catnaroek]

The mean is an precisely defined operation in mathematics, not a vaguely defined “pattern” in software engineering.

I insist: You only need “patterns” when you can't articulate your ideas precisely in a formal language, such as a programming language or mathematics.

[guelo]

Maybe they would call it a monoid or something much clearer like that.

[catnaroek]

Fortunately you have about an hour to edit your comment into something that, at least, is not patently stupid.