Why Functional? Why Haskell? Or more precisely, why is this discussion centered around some mainstream imperative language? Imperative languages have had a long and colored history, and current popular imperative languages are based on a solid foundation of lessons learned over the last several decade. The domain of imperative languages is mature, and well known. It is precisely this knowledge that tells us why it is difficult to write fault free code in imperative languages. Side effects within a program is when the outcome of a function or procedure is based on something other than the parameters passed to it. This is usually reflective of the program state and can be as simple as a global variable or flag. But this ‘side effect’ renders the function or procedure just a little less deterministic and a little less knowable in operation. Code that is written without side effects is known as ‘pure code’, and most functional languages are for the most part based on pure code. Haskell is considered to be a pure language, but for practical reasons supports both side effects and imperative constructs (encapsulated in Monads). Since most of the code in a Haskell program is pure, there is no concept of program flow or state within this code. This means that statements (or statement blocks) can be re-ordered arbitrarily without impact. It also means that a compiler can be very aggressive about condensing, short-circuiting and otherwise optimizing code within a given statement. To summarize, side effects exist in all useful languages, but are explicitly contained (and discouraged) in functional language, and exhibit fewer related faults. In contrast, side effects are encouraged as a methodology for programming in imperative languages (e... ... middle of paper ... ...of faults in imperative languages, and there is a great deal of evidence showing that faults are also somewhat proportional to the number of lines of code. If our goal is to develop methods to developing code with fewer faults, these characteristics show that functional languages are a solid foundation to build this approach. The easy part of this question is ‘why Haskell’, and can be dismissed quickly. Haskell was chosen as the most mature of the modern functional languages. Although most functional languages are based on pure code, it is necessary reality that useful code requires support for side effects, state and program flow. Haskell has addressed that need and provides support for these capabilities through encapsulation in Monads. By measures of active community and large projects, Haskell is arguably one of the most successful of the functional languages.
of the FORTAN programming language: “You need the willingness to fail all the time. You have
Ned Block in Troubles with Functionalism offers his Absent Qualia Argument. The argument provides a counter example to functionalism. The essential aspect to the functional theory of mind defines mentality in terms of its functional states of a system. The functional states of a system match states according to their inputs, outputs, and internal states. Block’s counter example argues for the possibility of two systems to have the same functional states which determines their functional equivalence. In addition to functional equivalence, the two systems have distinguishable mental states. If functionalism is as adequate account of mentality, then functional equivalence entails mental state equivalence. Block argues against the consequent of
In this paper I will explain and argue for functionalism. Functionalism is another form of mind-body physicalism, it accepts that many of our mental concepts are defined partly in terms of behavior and stimuli. What caused the rise of functionalism is the multiple realization theory. This theory objects to the identity theory because humans are able to feel pain due to a stimulus response in the ACC. Other animals and organisms are able to also feel pain because pain in their brains can be detected in different regions that are different from a human brain. The basic idea of functionalism is that our minds are organized in a functional way. The roles are defined by how we respond to a certain stimuli such as pain. Pain causes body damage,
In ‘Troubles with Functionalism’, Block raised a few objections against two versions of functionalism on specifying inputs and outputs. According to functionalism, mental states are identified by what they do rather than by what they are made of. There are two theories that functionalists use to define the mental states which are common-sense functionalism and scientific functionalism. Common-sense functionalism is a theory that is made up of platitudes of our mental states such that everyone who possess the concepts of mental states can recognize as true. Scientific functionalism is about learning upon scientific investigations of how our minds work.
Jackson, F., and Pettit, P., 1990, 'Program Explanation: a general perspective', Analysis, vol. 50, pp. 107-117.
Functionalism is a materialist stance in the philosophy of mind that argues that mental states are purely functional, and thus categorized by their input and output associations and causes, rather than by the physical makeup that constitutes its parts. In this manner, functionalism argues that as long as something operates as a conscious entity, then it is conscious. Block describes functionalism, discusses its inherent dilemmas, and then discusses a more scientifically-driven counter solution called psychofunctionalism and its failings as well. Although Block’s assertions are cogent and well-presented, the psychofunctionalist is able to provide counterarguments to support his viewpoint against Block’s criticisms. I shall argue that though both concepts are not without issue, functionalism appears to satisfy a more acceptable description that philosophers can admit over psychofunctionalism’s chauvinistic disposition that attempts to limit consciousness only to the human race.
Functionalism is a theory of contemporary philosophy of the mind, designed to provide a solution to behaviourism and identity theory, but more importantly a solution to the mind/body problem. In this essay I will discuss the theory of functionalism, and what solution it offers in resolving the mind/body problem. The mind/body problem examines the relationship between the mind and physical matter, more specifically the relationship between consciousness and the brain that other theories of the mind have failed to account for. Solutions to the mind body problem attempt to explain one’s subjective experience of an objective physical world.
Sociology is a science with a diversity of topics to discuss about; however the purpose of this paper is to give a brief definition and a personal explanation of the three ways to view the world sociologically under Structural Functionalism, The Conflict Theory, and Symbolic Interactionism. When defining Structural Functionalism, Robert K. Merton defines this concept as the way that society function/work together as a whole; he particularly specify functions as the actions of humans that could bring beneficial consequences. His view for this perspective was to keep social systems in balance by either manifest or latent functions. The manifest function is intended to help people by advocating in favor to whatever is observed to be needed within the social groups, and to reward in order to see it happen, the outcome should have a positive effect on society. The latent functions can be described as the unexpected consequences of the manifest functions, and have a negative effect on society.
As a result a huge number of organisations have become software dependent. Some of these systems are used to safeguard the lives of many people. This means that if these systems were to fail they could lead to devastating consequences. Here are some examples of where software systems are used heavily and could be very dangerous if they were to fail - aviation, hospitals, space exploration, nuclear power stations and communications. I will be looking at some examples of actual software failure in these fields to explain the reasons why systems fail.2.0 Reasons for Systems FailureIf software systems failure can be so dangerous why can they not be completely eliminated? According to Parnas, "The main reason is that software can never be guaranteed to be 100% reliable.
Sometimes within the Functional analysis, creating a testing situation leaves out something small, but crucial piece of information, that occurs within the natural surroundings (perhaps the kid most effective desires a green train). That is an extremely good instance of whilst different sources of statistics along with descriptive tests, direct commentary, and interviews are useful in reporting more information to make the testing situations seem real or help with treatment selections. Some other difficulty, is a Functional analysis may additionally produce a transient increase in problem behavior. “The problem behavior may maintain or take place more regularly if the evaluation is ended before the suitable behavior is taught. To avoid this, we end the analysis as soon as we've got sufficient records to teach us something about the behavior” (Hanley, Iwata, & McCord, 2003).
Complexity of a program has often accompanied simplicity of form like early Le Corbusier. More recent explanation for the simplicity in architecture, are various expansions of Mies Van der Rohe, contradictory “Less is more”. In response to Mies van der Rohe’s famous proclamation, Venturi replied: “Less is a bore.”
When executing (running), the compiler first parses (or analyzes) all of the language statements syntactically one after the other and then, in one or more successive stages or "passes", builds the output code, making sure that statements that refer to other statements are referred ...
Software testing is the “process of executing a software system to determine whether it matches its specification and executes in its intended environment” (Whittaker 71). It is often associated with locating bugs, program defects, faults in the source code, which cause failures during execution that need to be removed from the program. Locating and removing these defects is called debugging, which is different from the testing that establishes the existence of these defects. Specifications are crucial to testing because they identify correct behavior so that software failures corresponding to incorrect behavior can be identified. Failures can vary in their nature ranging from wrong output, system crash to systems using too much memory or executing too slowly. These Bugs in software can be due to untested code executed, u...
In social science, Functionalism is the theory that put pressure on the dependence of the patterns and institutions of our society and her interaction by preserving her cultural and society unity. In Sociology, functionalism came from the sociologist EMILE DURKHEIM, who viewed our society as a sort of “ORGANISM” that brings with it certain “needs” that must be complete. The American sociologist Talcott Parsons analysed very extensive societies with regards to their social order, integration and stability.
... the standards or how it compares to other available implementations. Pascal is still used today, both as an educational tool for programming, as well as a liable language for industrial, commercial, scientific, shareware and freeware applications. The Pascal language is available on a number of different platforms, both commercially and through open source. Pascal is a useful programming language which has been used for decades now. It continues to grow but is not the most effective programming language in my opinion. It has a great history and will be remembered in computing and programming history for all ages and will continue to teach people a different way of programming. Thank you for reading my essay.