4 ms·
Object orientation and pattern matching is not an obvious mix. A lot of OO is about dependency inversion, which is more or less the exact opposite of what patte
by jmartinpetersen 10y ago
Object orientation and pattern matching is not an obvious mix. A lot of OO is about dependency inversion, which is more or less the exact opposite of what pattern matching gives you. It can be a powerful tool in the right hands but could also lead to absolute horror. Sometimes it feels like Mads and co. are too focused on making C# functional-like and in the process encourages a lot of foot-shooting.
- ahartman00 10y ago"Sometimes it feels like Mads and co. are too focused on making C# functional-like and in the process encourages a lot of foot-shooting" I agree. When they added dynamic and functional concepts, I though: great, a dynamic/statically typed imperative/functional oo language. Too many different ways to do things, makes it harder to understand code written in a different style. Basically the opposite of python's "pythonic way" idiomatic style. I do love functional programming, which is why I am trying to move to f#. People at work are open to the idea!!