I think it's fair to say rust is imperatively functional. As opposed to declaratively functional. The combination of expression-oriented design, traits (clearly inspired by haskell's typeclasses), a strong focus on safety and minimal mutability, strong typing principles (Optional, Result and such safety oriented control flow encoders - also inspired from haskell), highly efficient iterators which makes them usable in regular control flow (much like haskell) - all of this screams functional programming to me.
Though this isn't super special. Throughout the last decade, these very same concepts have been picked up by many modern languages and adopted by older mainstream languages. But since rust started out with all of this - I think it'd be fair to call rust a part of the functional family.
I think it's fair to say rust is imperatively functional. As opposed to declaratively functional. The combination of expression-oriented design, traits (clearly inspired by haskell's typeclasses), a strong focus on safety and minimal mutability, strong typing principles (
Optional,Resultand such safety oriented control flow encoders - also inspired from haskell), highly efficient iterators which makes them usable in regular control flow (much like haskell) - all of this screams functional programming to me.Though this isn't super special. Throughout the last decade, these very same concepts have been picked up by many modern languages and adopted by older mainstream languages. But since rust started out with all of this - I think it'd be fair to call rust a part of the functional family.
Thanks for clarifying 👍😉