Even if that meant something in the past, it really isn't a useful definition any more, because pretty much all languages do this. That's why I offered my alternative description. Even if it too has flaws, I think it's a more meaningful description.
sremani != ZenoArrow (though if you read this sremani, thank you for attempting to clarify).
There are many 'multi-paradigm' languages, and C# is one of them. From the C# Wikipedia page...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_Sharp_(programming_language)
"C# (pronounced as see sharp) is a multi-paradigm programming language encompassing strong typing, imperative, declarative, functional, generic, object-oriented (class-based), and component-oriented programming disciplines."
What makes a language 'functional' is first-class functions (i.e. functions that can be treated as values, which is what I was referring to in my earlier post).
As sremani said, F# is 'functional first', in the sense that the language is designed to make functional algorithms straightforward to express. You can write C# in a functional way too, but there's less syntactic sugar for this style of programming.
Hope that clears it up.
Apologies, my mistake.
> Hope that clears it up.
First paragraph on the Wikipedia page for Functional Programming [1]:
"In computer science, functional programming is a programming paradigm—a style of building the structure and elements of computer programs—that treats computation as the evaluation of mathematical functions and avoids changing-state and mutable data. It is a declarative programming paradigm, which means programming is done with expressions[1] or declarations[2] instead of statements."
I'll stick with my definition.
Hope that clears it up.
That's why I prefer to stick to the 'expression oriented' concept, it seems to be the thing that captures most, if not all, functional languages. But I guess just like there are plenty of people that wouldn't call Java OO (and would prefer the Alan Kay definition), there are plenty that will disagree with any definition of 'functional'
(preparing for the inevitable 'functional first' comment).
