This article brings up an interesting question. Since much of programming is based on simply making something easier for humans to read, create and design with, is there a trade off with functional programming in regards to debugging?
I really appreciate some aspects of both styles, but I am not a die hard either way, my limited experience with functional programming has never lead me into the depths of debugging like discussed in the article. So the article actually makes me wary of going further.
I would liken this effect to a form of technical debt similar to a framework. Upfront development is faster, but when there's a problem, it's much harder to fix or work around, and problems can be more obscure.
I really appreciate some aspects of both styles, but I am not a die hard either way, my limited experience with functional programming has never lead me into the depths of debugging like discussed in the article. So the article actually makes me wary of going further.
I would liken this effect to a form of technical debt similar to a framework. Upfront development is faster, but when there's a problem, it's much harder to fix or work around, and problems can be more obscure.
Is this concern valid?