[rramadass]

The original article did not actually make much sense to me since there can be no "Programming beyond Paradigms" by virtue of the fact that all languages allow solving problems in at least one "default" Paradigm (the computation model embodied by its abstract machine). Thus the correct term is "Multi Paradigm" and current day languages do this to varying levels of ease by providing appropriate syntactic features mapping to abstract machines. In that regard Mozart/Oz is the poster child since unlike other languages that is its stated goal.

The author states "I believe that programming paradigms are now best understood as a style of programming, rather than as an exclusive set of features." which is not correct. A "Style of Programming" is not a "Paradigm" unless that style embodies a specific computation/abstract machine model. The relevant syntactic features could be used in a mix-and-match manner to increase the design expression space. A good example is the template features in C++; originally designed as an alternative to macros to implement containers until some smart people figured out that it was much more powerful and could be used for programming in the "Functional Paradigm" (with some additional extensions).