> There are some posts about it elsewhere, but iterative programming tends to make reasoning about the storage of different objects in memory quite a bit easier.

Depending on what you mean by "functional", this is not always true. Rust is essentially a functional language - in that, just like functional languages, it prevents you from mixing shared state with mutability; plus it heavily uses functional features like closures - but it makes it quite easy to reason about the storage of data objects.

I view OOP as basically mistaken, particularly wrt. choices like implementation inheritance as an "idiomatic" element of software design. And newer languages like Rust make the exact same choice there. But once you take the trouble to carefully "unpack" stuff like implementation-inheritance, even OOP is quite compatible with a functional paradigm.