[mpweiher]

Yes, function composition is one kind of glue, and it's good that we have it. But it's only one kind of glue, and often not particularly useful (see the part of the post about algorithm DSLs).

As John Hughes put it in Why Functional Programming Matters, we need more kinds of glue.

See https://blog.metaobject.com/2019/02/why-architecture-oriente...

As to Design Patterns: the Smalltalk version of the Design Patterns book is a small booklet, most of the patterns just go away. As to the video: tried to watch, got to the "it's functions, functions functions and again functions" slide. For OO, it would be "it's objects, objects, objects and again, objects". Sadly, most FP-centered critiques of OO are at this level, or even worse. :-/

Overall, you're going to have more patterns in FP because its model of computation is less powerful. (See Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html for a definition of relative power ).