[dmbarbour]

I don't believe FP has any strong assumption that all problems reduce to the same kind of algorithm. Rather, different kinds of algorithm are modeled typefully - e.g. with various monads or abstract data types.

As you mention, pure FP does require learning different idioms. OTOH, a lot of those idioms can be applied effectively to imperative programming, so learning isn't necessarily a wasted effort even if you spend most of your time wrist deep in C code.

[norea-armozel]

I see you point. I just think there's better options if you're going to approach FP. I think picking a language that's flexible about it's enforcement is one approach. I think I've learned more from Common LISP and Ocaml about FP than I ever did from Haskell. It's not to say Haskell is a bad language, but it's just not one you can pick up in a day.