Your question was phrased incorrectly, though. Anyway, I'm not sure what murbard2 is objecting to. The only thing I got is "Functional programming languages sh

Your question was phrased incorrectly, though. Anyway, I'm not sure what murbard2 is objecting to. The only thing I got is "Functional programming languages shine when they deal with complex, recursive data structures, not for simple tasks which are primarily IO and need to handle many cases." Well, OCaml-the-language does IO perfectly fine (even if you want to augment/replace the standard library, which admittedly does few things "perfectly fine"), and languages with algebraic datatypes are very good at handling "many cases" in a typesafe way.