After I got past the introduction, I liked this article a lot better. I like to focus on what something says, rather than on how it's written. Unfortunately,

After I got past the introduction, I liked this article a lot better. I like to focus on what something says, rather than on how it's written. Unfortunately, the introduction is so tangled and wordy, I found that hard to do. Example: "In many cases, purists see the essence of immutability as a precondition for any given language to fall into the category of functional programming." As an editor, I might suggest "Purists would say functional programming requires immutability." Example: "But we can extend the larger picture of immutability beyond the strict ecosystem of data structures alone and instead encompass any object that adheres to the notion of immutability." How about "But immutability applies to more than just data structures." Happily, where it talks about code, the article is pretty straightforward.