What is functional programming good for except writing one-liners?

Writing entire programs

Writing clickbait blog posts.

Making ideas from the 60's and 70's seem new by changing their name and syntax.

Abusing mathematical terminology.

Confusing the map with the territory.

What is provability?

Haskell at least is good a specifying what some code CANNOT do. This is nice for instance in order to know if you can safely retry an operation in a transactional section or whether some function is thread-safe.

Expressivity without losing too much readability is also a big win.

>>52400928
That have no side effects because no one will ever run them?

>>52401362
>haskell
>readability

>>52400732
>Haskell
>one liners
.You're thinking of LISP

Confusing your co-workers after you leave the company and they have to maintain your code

>>52401743
How is that in any way related to functional programming and not to writing shitty code. It's really easy to write self documenting functional code that hardly even needs documentation.

>>52401230
/thread

>>52401891
It's not that the code is shitty, it's that most programmers don't learn about functional programming. They're python babies who barely understand C. You write some helper programs in Haskell for your main projects and you've given yourself job security because odds are you're one of the only ones in the company who bothered to learn how to use it. So everything goes wrong if they don't keep someone on the job who can maintain the helper programs.

>>52402170
Oh I though you were taking a piss on functional programming instead of shitty devs.

And lets be honest your average programmer is shit. They know the one language they've been working with recently somewhat but doing anything else is going to be a huge challenge for them.