In my experience learning, teaching, and watching other people learn FP, it's far easier to learn FP with a language which is actually designed for it, e.g., Elm.
JavaScript isn't that. It carries too much legacy baggage. Too many gotchas; too many pointy bits. It's also just super noisy.
There's a reason why someone had to write The Good Parts. I don't buy the idea either that modern JavaScript is somehow devoid of the kinds of problems that existed when Crockford wrote that book. I mean, how many people still think that `const` gives you an immutable value?
n.b. I'm not sure why the Haskell snippet was included. It's confusing, and doesn't even make sense given that `main` is defined twice.
JavaScript isn't that. It carries too much legacy baggage. Too many gotchas; too many pointy bits. It's also just super noisy.
There's a reason why someone had to write The Good Parts. I don't buy the idea either that modern JavaScript is somehow devoid of the kinds of problems that existed when Crockford wrote that book. I mean, how many people still think that `const` gives you an immutable value?
n.b. I'm not sure why the Haskell snippet was included. It's confusing, and doesn't even make sense given that `main` is defined twice.