[hresvelgr]

> In my professional experience the problems usually start when you begin talking about pure functions which in theory are awesome but sometimes don't map to a problem domain well, or become extremely hard for Joe Developer to get used to.

It's a ripe field for research. I do wonder if there is a better way to program in a pure functional way that conforms to the impurity of the real world. I agree with you though, I think while pure FP is a tantalising abstraction, it must obey the the whims of the hardware. The only way you're getting pure FP to the absolute bottom is if you can monadically formalise the hardware you're running on, which has been attempted [1].

> Often times I will think in a functional way, but rewrite things into a procedural way, because communicating your idea is often just as important as the code you write.

I think this is perhaps the common benefit that is cited from learning FP. It provides an alternate way of expressing the same solution, but maybe in a simpler fashion. The reverse is also true, what is not straight forward in FP may be expressed simpler, procedurally.

[1] https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mom22/itp10-armv7.pdf