4 ms·

"It's possible there are some other ideas from OO worth salvaging, but more likely I think OO is just an evolutionary dead-end." I don't know why it is that so

by j_baker 17y ago

"It's possible there are some other ideas from OO worth salvaging, but more likely I think OO is just an evolutionary dead-end." I don't know why it is that some functional programmers insist on putting a diatribe against OOP in every little thing they write. I understand where they're coming from, but can they just not fathom that there could be a different way of doing things than what they're used to?

jerf 17y ago
OO is the current dominant programming paradigm and has been for the past ~15-20 years. Functional programmers in general can't help but know about OO; most of them were OO programmers before they became functional programmers. Combined with the fact that being popular has advantages (more people working on core code, an increased ability to get a job in $YOUR_FAVORITE_LANGUAGE), which causes a desire to recruit more to their cause, you end up with a strong likelihood of seeing a recruitment pitch targeted at the largest recruitable demographic. In this case, this means promising fire and brimstone to the OO heretics unless you come to the light of FP. (The linked post is not that strong, but I've seen much stronger.) You generally don't see recruitment pitches for logic programmers or VDHL programmers. You should listen to the functional programmer's complaints against OO, then make up your own mind. My programming has gotten a lot more functional lately, but there are certain domains where OO really, really shines and I still end up using it there (GUI widgets, etc). It's definitely not the right solution to every problem, though. (I am aware you did not make that argument, I'm just sayin'.)
- j_baker 17y ago
  It's less the strength of the complaint as much as it is the context. If I'm reading an article about the strengths and weaknesses about functional programming vs OOP, it's fine to include such things. However, I think in this post it detracts from the author's main point. By the end of the first few paragraphs, I was focused more on thinking "Oh, this is another of those rants against OOP" than I was on the actual content.

by j_baker 17y ago

jerf 17y ago

OO is the current dominant programming paradigm and has been for the past ~15-20 years. Functional programmers in general can't help but know about OO; most of them were OO programmers before they became functional programmers. Combined with the fact that being popular has advantages (more people working on core code, an increased ability to get a job in $YOUR_FAVORITE_LANGUAGE), which causes a desire to recruit more to their cause, you end up with a strong likelihood of seeing a recruitment pitch targeted at the largest recruitable demographic. In this case, this means promising fire and brimstone to the OO heretics unless you come to the light of FP. (The linked post is not that strong, but I've seen much stronger.) You generally don't see recruitment pitches for logic programmers or VDHL programmers. You should listen to the functional programmer's complaints against OO, then make up your own mind. My programming has gotten a lot more functional lately, but there are certain domains where OO really, really shines and I still end up using it there (GUI widgets, etc). It's definitely not the right solution to every problem, though. (I am aware you did not make that argument, I'm just sayin'.)

j_baker 17y ago
It's less the strength of the complaint as much as it is the context. If I'm reading an article about the strengths and weaknesses about functional programming vs OOP, it's fine to include such things. However, I think in this post it detracts from the author's main point. By the end of the first few paragraphs, I was focused more on thinking "Oh, this is another of those rants against OOP" than I was on the actual content.