so, no real evidence except anecdotes. Anyway, I was not claiming anything about functional programming being better. I was merely saying Object-Oriented is not necessarily data-centric. That being said, Lisp & OCaml programmers will argue the statement that FP implies immutability. OCaml strings ARE mutable, (so are OCaml arrays) and you have the keyword 'mutable'. Lisp has setq ... IMO FP does imply that you treat mutation & side effects with the respect they deserve.