[mithametacs]

Grandparent was such a good post otherwise!

I love strong types. I love for loops. I love stacks.

GP! Try Rust. Imperative programming isn’t orthogonal to types. You can go hard in Rust. (I loved experimenting with it but I like GC)

GP! Try data driven design. Imperative programming isn’t orthogonal to declarative.

Real talk, show me any declarative game engine that’s worth looking at. The best ones are all imperative and data driven design is popular. Clearly imperative code has something going for it.

and the advantages aren’t strictly speed of development, but imperative can be clearer. It just depends.

[stouset]

I adore Rust. My point isn’t that you can’t have both, but that the two types of programmers have different default approaches to problem solving. One prefers to model the boundaries of domain as best they can (define what it should look like before implementing how it works), one prefers to do things procedurally (implement how it works and let “what it looks like” emerge as a natural result).

Neither is strongly wrong or right, better or worse. They have different strengths in different problem areas, though I do think we’ve swung far too hard toward the procedural approach in the last decade.

[mithametacs]

I agree with the distinction in approaches. In other words, it sounds like you're distinguishing agile and waterfall.

I just find it odd to analogize:

> agile : waterfall :: imperative : declarative

[stouset]

Either you misread something or I communicated poorly.