3 ms·

Little unsolicited wordly advice: If holding on to a belief requires you to rationalize that everybody else is stupid and wrong may be it is time to re-evaluate

• mcphage 11y ago
  > If holding on to a belief requires you to rationalize that everybody else is stupid and wrong may be it is time to re-evaluate your belief. Hardly. There's plenty of valid criticisms of OO out there. However, that does not mean every criticism of OO is valid. Take this one, for instance: the author is complaining that OO is optimized for class inheritance, when it's not the normal case. However, plenty of OO languages don't have classes, or inheritance, and so it falls on its face as a criticism of OO. > If OOP were that good how come nobody made a killing with an implementation that would make these 'true Scotsman' folks happy. Because no OO implementation will make them happy. A little unsolicited worldly advice: programmers think themselves paragons of rationality, but they're susceptible to the same flow of fashion, and the same desire to believe ill of something they don't like, as everyone else. > other paradigms don't seem to need such pervasive apologism. They do—take a look at the comments when articles come out critical of functional programming, most of which are as good as the one under discussion here. Or when OO supplanted structural programming the first place.