I see your point, but you are still passing the entire state of the entire object to your function if you want to follow that line of thought. This is also dis

I see your point, but you are still passing the entire state of the entire object to your function if you want to follow that line of thought. This is also discussed in the article, and it’s not really what functional programming is about. What other state is in there that the function has access to? Maybe on a case-by-case basis you can say that particular object only has one piece of data, but in the general case this is definitely not what purity and functional programming is about.