>Gilad provides a humble deconstruction of common myths and claims of the FP culture He argued with a joke from a comic and lost. Even he would laugh in your

>Gilad provides a humble deconstruction of common myths and claims of the FP culture He argued with a joke from a comic and lost. Even he would laugh in your face at the notion that there was anything humble about his talk. >He is skeptical and I didn't find any of his conclusions to be dismissive That is precisely the opposite of reality. He doesn't even understand functional programming, he is thus not skeptical, he is dismissive. >He was there to break through the hype and I think he was successful. The fact that both he and you believe there is "hype" is indicative of the problem. "Hey, you should learn things and improve your skills" is not hype. Most of what he says is outright wrong. He talks about smalltalk inventing all of this FP stuff that was in ML before smalltalk-76 "invented" them. He pretends smalltalk predates FP, except again, ML predates smalltalk-76. and smalltalk-72 didn't have the stuff he is talking about. He talks about things "FP languages can't do", but that I do all the time in haskell with no issues. He repeats the oldest most worn out fallacious arguments that have been debunked over and over, and pretends that since nobody is allowed to interrupt the talk to correct him, his arguments are correct. Everything about his talk is an example of the exact opposite of what you suggest it is. If you want someone to convincingly lie to you about how FP isn't all that, look to Erik Meijer. Gilad sucks at it.