|
|
|
|
|
by AnimalMuppet
4218 days ago
|
|
I think (perhaps unknowingly) you're just playing a semantic game. By your definition everything is imperative, even if it is also totally declarative. All programs are imperative in your sense. Even if you could tell the computer "Do what I want" and expect it to be psychic, that would still be imperative by your definition. But the difference between imperative programming and declarative programming is not drawn by "ordering something done" (even if the article didn't define things precisely enough to prevent confusion on this point). It's basically a level-of-abstraction/level-of-detail thing. Saying "double each number in this list" is significantly different than saying "follow this step-by-step algorithm to double each number in the list". The boundaries can get fuzzy; arguments can be made about where to draw the lines. But your approach lumps everything on one side of the line, and therefore becomes incapable of saying anything very useful. |
|