Hi Lawrence, Thus quoth Lawrence Bottorff at 04:56 on Tue, Jan 17 2017:
I harp on all this because if Haskell is stateless/immutable and in total disregard of any underlying memory field, then it seems it should progress to hyper-recursion.
The characteristics you are putting forward are generally attributed to declarative programming (kinda): loosely put, programming in which you describe your intentions instead of describing how they should actually be implemented. While Haskell falls rather heavily within declarative programming, some (theoretically proven undecidability) issues prevent it from entirely having the mentioned characteristics. On the other hand, hyper-recursion seems to be an informal metaphor overhanging a couple formal concepts (fixed points, corecursion, but not only). Haskell aims to be a "well formalised" language, so while it can handle fixed points and corecursion, it cannot handle some abstractions which are too loose and therefore difficult to formalise (but still useful as tools for intuitive exploration). Conclusion: you are describing an intuition of a model of computing, which could fall within declarative programming once formalised. Haskell also falls within declarative programming, but this does not mean it is particularly better suited than any other programming language. <optional-part1> I believe I'm indirectly citing what people have already said in this discussion. </optional-part1> <optional-part2> I do not mean to criticise your point of view, I actually find it rather interesting. </optional-part2> -- Sergiu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarative_programming