Perish or Flourish? A Holistic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation in Functional Programming
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Functional programming provides strong foundations for developing reliable and secure software systems, yet its adoption remains not widespread due to the steep learning curve. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) for code generation present new opportunities to lower these barriers. However, extensive evaluations of LLMs largely focus on imperative programming languages, and their capabilities in functional programming languages (FP) remain underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce FPEval, a holistic evaluation framework built on FPBench, a new benchmark of 721 programming tasks across three difficulty levels on three mainstream FP languages: Haskell, Ocaml and Scala. FPEval provides compehensive evaluation infrastructures with both test validations with comprehensive test suites and static analysis tools to assess both functional correctness and code style and maintainability. Using this framework, we evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, and GPT-5, for code generation in functional programming languages and Java as an imperative baseline. Our results demonstrate that LLM performance in functional programming improves substantially with model advancement; however, error rates remain significantly higher in purely functional languages (Haskell and OCaml) than in hybrid (Scala) or imperative (Java) languages. Moreover, LLMs frequently generate non-idiomatic functional code that follows imperative patterns, raising concerns about code style and long-term maintainability. Finally, we show that LLMs can partially self-repair both correctness and quality issues when provided with static analysis feedback and hand-crafted instructions for common types of issues.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jan 2026.
Builds on
13 of 31 references.
References · 13
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2022Do Users Write More Insecure Code with AI Assistants?cited by 186
- 2023Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programmingcited by 87
- 2024HumanEval-XL: A Multilingual Code Generation Benchmark for Cross-lingual Natural Language Generalizationcited by 84
- 2023Refining ChatGPT-Generated Code: Characterizing and Mitigating Code Quality Issuescited by 78
- 2023"It's Weird That it Knows What I Want": Usability and Interactions with Copilot for Novice Programmerscited by 62
- 2024DafnyBench: A Benchmark for Formal Software Verificationcited by 54
- 2024Evaluating LLM-driven User-Intent Formalization for Verification-Aware Languagescited by 16
- 2025Can LLMs Reason About Program Semantics? A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Formal Specification Inferencecited by 14
- 2024Investigating the Performance of Language Models for Completing Code in Functional Programming Languages: a Haskell Case Studycited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.