[d--b]

Strong types: yes, it’s definitely better

Functional programming: no, functional programming as in: the final program consists in piping functions together and calling the pipe. In my opinion, that tends to get in the way of complex error handling.

The problem being that raising Exceptions at a deep level and catching them at some higher level is not pure functional programming. So your code has to deal with all the cases. It is more reliable if you can do it, but large systems have way too many failure points to be able to handle them all in a way that is practical.

[hibikir]

That's only a problem when you decide that the way to do error handling is exceptions. When you go with a strongly typed functional programming language, you throw exceptions away, and the fact that something can error, and what kinds of errors it can produce, are encoded into the type system.

So yes, generating errors at a deep level and catching them at a higher one is a normal pard of the system design, it's purely functional, ando nothing strange happens, in very large systems. You ADT the errors, pipe up entire families of them, and select what you manage. It's significantly easier than exceptions, in the sense that I can be sure when I've validated the error.

It's practical, and typically one dedicates less code to the error handling than, say, yor typical enterprise Java program that is terrified of runtime exceptions and null checks every step of the way. In fact, I'd argue this is the main selling point of strongly typed FP.

[wiseowise]

> When you go with a strongly typed functional programming language, you throw exceptions away, and the fact that something can error, and what kinds of errors it can produce, are encoded into the type system.

You’ve just reinvented checked exceptions, good job.

[siwatanejo]

Return type DUs are so much better than checked exceptions.

[breadwinner]

> that tends to get in the way of complex error handling.

Agree. In Java, Streams allow you to process collections in a functional style. This feature enables concise, expressive data manipulation with operations like map, filter, and reduce.

Some people point out that Java's checked exceptions spoil the simplicity and elegance of Streams by forcing you to handle exceptions.

But that's not a reason to not have checked exceptions, it is a reason to not do functional style composition when methods can throw exceptions. Streams was invented for collections, which tend not to throw exceptions. If proper error handling is important don't do Streams.

[tombert]

The Java streams are cool and I like them, but they're not a replacement for a functional type system or a functional language.

`map` is a lot more than a fancy for-loop for lists and arrays; it's about abstracting away the entire idea of context. Java streams aren't a substitute for what you have in Haskell.

[dionian]

Yes, they are really a poor emulation of scala which makes it a bit more usable.

[zelphirkalt]

If you have strong types, it is still possible to make a mutable thing, that will be mutated from the other end of the program and that will introduce bugs, that can be hard to find. If you are doing FP on the other hand, at least change always results in new objects, with structural sharing at most. This excludes a whole category of bugs.

[Jensson]

> If you are doing FP on the other hand, at least change always results in new objects, with structural sharing at most. This excludes a whole category of bugs.

Not if you program it with a mutable god object to mimic creating a new big state, then you have exactly the same kind of issues.

The issue is if you try to program a transaction flow using object oriented programming, that is not very good, and most work programmers do revolves around involves flows. But when it doesn't then functional programming isn't a very good or reliable solution.

[zelphirkalt]

> Not if you program it with a mutable god object to mimic creating a new big state, then you have exactly the same kind of issues.

Have you done any FP? That's not how you do FP.

[adamddev1]

Mr. Error Monad enters the chat...