I'm responding to the article, which made the claim that the tradeoff when using a functional language is performance vs correctness. This is obviously not true in any meaningful capacity, when the vast majority of imperative language deployments are using languages slower than the vast majority of functional language deployments. The fact that the most popular imperative languages are usually JIT compiled (not interpreted, except python) instead of statically compiled is not relevant to the argument.
The claim wasn't "most popular vs. most popular". Why don't you choose "highest performance `FP language` vs highest performance `imperative language`"?
Also, `FP language` and `imperative language` aren't well-defined concepts (nor can they be, frankly). These are paradigms that languages have varying degrees of support for. So the entire foundation of the argument is meaningless.
