The benefits of learning languages that you won't use [closed]

Question

I have read numerous time that learning a language such as Haskell, Lisp or Smalltalk will somehow make you a better programmer while you program in other languages.

Is there more than just anecdotal evidence for that claim? Or is it just the way people rationalize having spend a lot of time learning a programming language that they will never use?

Answer 1

IMHO, it is all about learning a new programming paradigm. If you know Java and then C#, there's not much gain, once both of them have almost the same "type of programming".

But if you get to learn a functional language or dynamic, for instance, you're forced to think another way, and that will probably help you to program better in your favorite language.

It is something like: "It is so easy doing this in {different language you learned}. There must be a better way to do this in {language you already know}". And then you rethink, and build up a more elegant way to do this in {language you already know}.

Answer 2

I don't have any hard evidence, but I have really appreciated the different way of looking at problems that I have since learning lisp (the same goes for python and c).

The key isn't necessarily learning different languages though, I believe that the key is actually the different viewpoints that you gain by learning different programming styles.

Good examples are functional, imperative, object-oriented, etc. Also, there are common design differences is interpreted vs compiled languages; static vs dynamic typing, etc.

Although most people do a majority of their programming using a single style (most commonly OOP over the past few years), I think that all programmers should know multiple styles so that they are better able to see the shortfalls of their own style.