Why not go full functional programming at that point? If the main issue with FP has been accessibility, then it should really take off now.

▲

zozbot234 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

When you do fully value-oriented programming in Rust (i.e. no interior mutability involved) that's essentially functional programming. There's mutable, ephemeral data involved, but it's always confined to a single well-defined context and never escapes from it. You can even have most of your code base be sans-IO, which is the exact same pattern you'd use in Haskell.

	▲	theLiminator 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I actually like rust more than Haskell, but `You can even have most of your code base be sans-IO, which is the exact same pattern you'd use in Haskell.` glosses over the fact that in Haskell it's enforced at compile time.

▲

tehnub 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wouldn’t because idiomatic Haskell is way slower than idiomatic Rust.

	▲	4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

jimbokun 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn’t Rust a pretty good functional language? It has most of the features that enable safe, correct code without being anal about immutability and laziness that make performance difficult to predict.