> Why can't FP's benefits be obvious so that it doesn't require evangelists? Because there aren't immediate benefits. They only pop out at scale and with compl

> Why can't FP's benefits be obvious so that it doesn't require evangelists? Because there aren't immediate benefits. They only pop out at scale and with complexity, as I said. > similar real world massive productivity improvement to Imperative Programming Because there isn't. It's a reasonable benefit, but it's not transformative. I think it's there, enough to commit to FP completely, but the massive productivity improvement doesn't exist, or at least, only exists in specific cases, e.g. the WhatsApp + Erlang + 50 engineers parable (you could argue that this is due to the actor model and BEAM, rather than FP. An argument for a different day). I feel like this hard + reasonable benefit isn't really efficient utilisation of people's time, especially when there's things like Deep Learning floating around. I think the immediate reaction to a lot of what FP evangelists claim is a shrug and a "I guess, but why bother?"