Makes me think of Curse of the Excluded Middle where Erik Meijer talks about functional-ish programming displacing the gains that could occur by full functional programming.
By this persons reasoning, I could program functionally in C.
I’d like to see a more detailed post titled Necessary but not Sufficient Mechanisms for Functional Programming
Are you referring to the OP? If so, I’m not sure how you gathered that. Look at OP’s first point: “Standard tooling fosters simplicity.”
It’s in reference to the “Functions are first-class” section. While functional programming is ill defined, function pointers alone do not make a language functional.
I find the headline a bit linkbaitish since the author concludes with:
Go is not a functional language, nor does it support the common functional applications. However, the spirit of Go definitely nods in the direction of the functional ideal: simplicity and ease of reasoning.
I’d argue that good code is simple and easily reasoned, regardless of which language or paradigm used.
It’s in reference to the “Functions are first-class” section.
I know that. Sorry, I guess I wasn’t clear. My point was that the OP’s reasoning would not apply to C because it would require ignoring everything else the OP said.
I find the headline a bit linkbaitish since the author concludes that Go is not a functional programming language:
shrug If it is, it’s pretty mild bait. To me, the headline implies that the OP is trying to persuade functional programmers to give Go a try. And indeed, that’s exactly what OP tries to do.