[dsffghfghfghfgh]

The typical perspective with functional programming, if you buy it, is that it is a little more investment in getting going, but once you have something compiling and working you spend less time on bugs and refactoring.

[astrange]

I think the problem with this claim is that "functional programming" (or "object-oriented" "procedural") aren't actually distinguishable kinds of languages but are more like social groups or aesthetic movements.

More important question is if a language has a spec or just a default implementation, and if so if that's a compiler, interpreter, JIT etc.