I don't know why, but in full size pistols, I actually respond better with the snappier recoil of .40, than I do in the same pistol in 9mm or .45. My carry HK USP is in .40, and I have a USP in 9 to go with my Gemtech 9mm multimount suppressor, and I've shot a USP 45 of a club member for a few magazines, and for whatever reason, I shoot the USP .40 better than either the 9 or the .45. Slide velocity and recoil impulse seems to have a lot to do with the "sweet spot" for me, as much as grip and trigger ergonomics and the sight picture.
I think I make use of the quicker/sharper recoil impulse to index back on target better/quicker or something. Other than that, I do agree the really good modern bullet designs have eliminated a lot/most of the "caliber debate". At least when everything else is equal.
In short/compact pistols, it might be different. But after the capacity argument, I think "what works for you" overrides everything else. Because you have to hit what your aiming at of course, for the terminal ballistic argument to even come into play.
10mm, .357Sig, .460/.45super in autos, or .357 or .44 mag from a revolver is still going to be in a higher class. Unless you're shooting the .357 from a snubbie and losing most of it's potential from short barrel and cylinder gap, and arguably not pushing it much harder than a .38 +p.