> The thing that actually determines the performance of real-word programs these days (after algorithm choice) is cache efficiency
> Today's programmers put way too much focus on performance
So statefulness is a meaningless concept in functional programming because... programmers put too much focus on performance? and cache efficiency is what matters?
Is there a logical chain of implications I'm missing here? I feel like we're not even in the same conversation at this point.
Well, I got lost trying to follow you. My position is: Functional programming more or less means expressing (denotational) computation without using a concept of (hidden, mutable) state. This is a good approach because it makes it easier to write correct programs. I disagree with the argument that a programming language should expose state at the language level (rather than making it a detail of the implementation) for the sake of performance on two levels: performance is less important than correctness, so it's a bad idea to sacrifice correctness for performance in language design, but also exposed state doesn't even help you improve performance (because cache efficiency is what matters).
> Today's programmers put way too much focus on performance
So statefulness is a meaningless concept in functional programming because... programmers put too much focus on performance? and cache efficiency is what matters?
Is there a logical chain of implications I'm missing here? I feel like we're not even in the same conversation at this point.