6 ms·
I think this article is uneducated and useless. He declares OO superior to all other paradigms by giving a few scenarios where it is better than procedural pro
by Deestan 17y ago
I think this article is uneducated and useless.
He declares OO superior to all other paradigms by giving a few scenarios where it is better than procedural programming.
As far as I can see, all the Good Things he points out in OO are (often better) implemented in functional languages.
- beza1e1 17y agoThe article doesn't compare OOP to anything. It tries to define OOP and considers it necessity. Personally i think FP is complementary to OOP and Haskell could be OOP according the articles definition (OOP=polymorphism). Maybe someone who knows Haskell better than me can comment on that? (disclaimer: i'm the author) Update: I just saw that i did write "OOP is better than other paradigms" and corrected that. Sorry!
- Deestan 17y ago> I just saw that i did write "OOP is better than other paradigms" and corrected that. Good. :) I guess it was mainly that sentence that got me into the wrong mindset. I read through the rest believing that it was along the same lines. I retract my complaint.