尽管Python可以进行函数式编程，但其并非专为此设计。Guido van Rossum更关注命令式/面向对象的使用场景，而未深入考虑函数式编程。Python缺乏模式匹配和尾递归，使得算法通常需要采用命令式方式实现，导致效率低下且代码不美观。此外，Python的功能性数据结构和语法支持不足，如没有内置的柯里化和组合函数，以及迭代器而非延迟计算等，都增加了函数式编程的难度。尽管如此，Python仍可通过第三方库弥补这些不足，但需要更多的努力来实现。
I have always thought that functional programming can be done in Python. Thus, I was surprised that Python didn't get much of a mention in this question, and when it was mentioned, it normally wasn't very positive. However, not many reasons were given for this (lack of pattern matching and algebraic data types were mentioned). So my question is: why isn't Python very good for functional programming? Are there more reasons than its lack of pattern matching and algebraic data types? Or are these concepts so important to functional programming that a language that doesn't support them can only be classed as a second rate functional programming language? (Keep in mind that my experience with functional programming is quite limited.)
解决方案
The question you reference asks which languages promote both OO and functional programming. Python does not promote functional programming even though it works fairly well.
The best argument against functional programming in Python is that imperative/OO use cases are carefully considered by Guido, while functional programming use cases are not. When I write imperative Python, it's one of the prettiest languages I know. When I write functional Python, it becomes as ugly and unpleasant as your average language that doesn't have a BDFL.
Which is not to say that it's bad, just that you have to work harder than you would if you switched to a language that promotes functional programming or switched to writing OO Python.
Here are the functional things I miss in Python:
No pattern matching and no tail recursion mean your basic algorithms have to be written imperatively. Recursion is ugly and slow in Python.
A small list library and no functional dictionaries mean that you have to write a lot of stuff yourself.
No syntax for currying or composition means that point-free style is about as full of punctuation as explicitly passing arguments.
Iterators instead of lazy lists means that you have to know whether you want efficiency or persistence, and to scatter calls to list around if you want persistence. (Iterators are use-once)
Python's simple imperative syntax, along with its simple LL1 parser, mean that a better syntax for if-expressions and lambda-expressions is basically impossible. Guido likes it this way, and I think he's right.
扫一扫
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
