> For me, the FP dream ( and we aren't quite there yet) is that your program is an airtight declaration of the desired functionality, and then we get out of the way and let the compilers and profiling runtimes optimize away.
I would guess we are at least 100 years away from this. Current imperative compilers miss obvious optimizations and FP typically needs many layers of optimization before it would be efficient. Any one layer failing to make progress would result in a very slow program.
Currently FP compilers generally don't even use successors for natural numbers because it would be slow. Typical programs use other data structures more complex than numbers that would need to be optimized into a mutable structure. If FP compilers can't do it for integers, they definitely can't for FP programs as a whole.
I would guess we are at least 100 years away from this. Current imperative compilers miss obvious optimizations and FP typically needs many layers of optimization before it would be efficient. Any one layer failing to make progress would result in a very slow program.
Currently FP compilers generally don't even use successors for natural numbers because it would be slow. Typical programs use other data structures more complex than numbers that would need to be optimized into a mutable structure. If FP compilers can't do it for integers, they definitely can't for FP programs as a whole.