"Object-orientation is better for the higher levels of a system, and functional programming is better for the lower levels."

"In fact, you know what? I love Ruby so much that I want to ruin it. Let’s see how much it can do if we remove all of its features. Naturally that means no gems, no standard library, no modules, methods, classes or objects. But this is love, so let’s go all the way: no control flow, no assignment, no arrays, strings, numbers or booleans."

"I’ve been fiddling around with top-down (mock-style) TDD of functional programs off-and-on for a few months. I’ve gotten obsessed with deferring the choice of data structures as long as possible. That seems appropriate in a functional language, where we should be talking about functions more than data. (And especially appropriate in Clojure, my language of choice, since Clojure lets you treat maps/dictionaries as if they were functions from keys to values.)"