3 ms·

Best modern language to learn object oriented programming

7 points by ds2643 9y ago

I'm a programmer who was introduced first to the functional paradigm. I'd like to better understand the object programming paradigm. In the past, people have suggested Smalltalk as the best medium for learning concepts central to OOP. However, I've found the tooling has regressed in recent decades to the extent that I find using the language unpleasant (please correct me if I'm wrong). In your opinion, which modern language best (and most simply) serves as a vehicle for teaching concepts core to OOP? I have no strong preference whether the type system is static or dynamic.

panic 9y ago
Ruby and Objective-C both have a strong Smalltalk lineage. You typically use the C part of Objective-C to perform basic operations like arithmetic and function calling -- if you know C already, it may be a more comfortable starting point, but it doesn't show off the power you get when every value is an object (and you can do things like add new numeric types while the system is running: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-October/025066.html http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-...).
pryelluw 9y ago
Have you tried F#? Its multi-paradigm and might make some thingd clearer. You can later move to C# and onto others. :)
- ds2643 9y ago
  I've tried OCaml, which I absolutely loved. I'd considered approaching F# before, since the language seems promising from a functional perspective, but I'm skeptical of the multiparadigm claim. In your experience, is F#'s OOP support beginner friendly? Also, is there decent literature available on F# as an OOP language?
  - pryelluw 9y ago
    Python is more beginner friendly, but lacks many of the enterprise patterns others have. Its a good intro though. The OOP docs for F# are average (not amazing). Feel free to email me!
AlexAMEEE 9y ago
I wrote many lines about Scala but then I lost the motivation to finish it. So I'll just write, Scala.
solomatov 9y ago
C# or Java. Most of the best OOP books are written for these languages.
Lordarminius 9y ago
Ruby. Use David Black's The Well grounded Rubyist or the PickAxe Book
git-pull 9y ago
I don't know if it's best, but I took on OOP in little bites: - ECMAScript 5 Mixins, scopes, instance variables, and instantiation. As a bonus, but not OOP, callbacks. It's a straight-forward language that's available abundance. - Python For it's class inheritance being easy to navigate. Instance variables, instantiation, method resolution order (MRO), mixins. - C++ This is the hardest language I can think of. It does everything OOP, and more, including allowing for a lot of stuff that's not legible. Despite that, it's a solid language. Something that goes great with constraining the many features of C++ are https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html or https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines. I think ES5 and Python are used very often and in terms of bang for the buck, give they cover a lot of the bread and butter OOP concepts.
- panic 9y ago
  C++ doesn't do everything OOP: it doesn't support the late bound message-send style OOP of Smalltalk at all. In particular, you can't implement #doesNotUnderstand: (http://wiki.c2.com/?DoesNotUnderstand http://wiki.c2.com/?DoesNotUnderstand) or replace one object with another unless they have a superclass-subclass relationship.
  - git-pull 9y ago
    It's the first time I heard of #doesNotUnderstand Despite it looking cool and useful, IMO it's more of a (quite pleasant) sugar than an OOP concept. There's also a try/catch example where you'd get similar behavior. I feel this is a bit opinionated: > "but this is clearly rather verbose and it has to be repeated for every call." I think the example in the link is what try/catch is meant for. Message passing systems in C/C++ handle situations where a disabled/unavailable service receives communication and recovers. As for C++ and replacing objects: I feel this is also a language-specific gotcha that doesn't hinder a learner understanding OOP. But C++ has many more gotchas than that. For instance, there's no pure "interface" keyword. It can still be done (and is), code example: https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#Ri-abstract https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines..., how Google Style guide defines it: https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Interfaces https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Interfaces
probinso 9y ago
The problem is that your programming is styled by the language you choose. If you decide to go down the route of python then the curse of consenting adults will paint the way you believe object-oriented programming should be done. Likewise if you select something like C++ or Java, then the curse of privacy will paint the way you think about object-oriented programming. The curse of privacy dictates that the existence of a public method will act as documentation for an object. methods only exists for the purpose of Performing operations on that objects type. This will make you think a lot more about how objects systems provide secure and well dictated data flow. Your objects will be authored to respect these ideas. The curse of consenting adults dictates that human readable code trumps control flow. The idea of inheriting from a dictionary in Python to Define your own class object makes for extremely powerful objects that are immediately designed to interface with the Python language. There however may be operations that can be applied to dictionaries that you may not want applied to your objects. If you really want to understand object-oriented programming, then you should use both. You should find as many programming languages as possible and explore how their idioms paint the color of your code. I expect this isn't a preferred answer, but the real message is if you pick one and learn it, don't stop there. It will take you time to become comfortable enough to Warrant breaking into another language. That all being said, python and ruby are easier as a programming languages (in general) than many Alternatives. So if you have to learn programming at the same time as object-oriented programming they aren't bad choices.
mhh__ 9y ago
<plug> D is a very nicely language for doing OOP in</plug>

7 points by ds2643 9y ago

panic 9y ago

Ruby and Objective-C both have a strong Smalltalk lineage. You typically use the C part of Objective-C to perform basic operations like arithmetic and function calling -- if you know C already, it may be a more comfortable starting point, but it doesn't show off the power you get when every value is an object (and you can do things like add new numeric types while the system is running: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-October/025066.html http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-...).

pryelluw 9y ago

Have you tried F#? Its multi-paradigm and might make some thingd clearer. You can later move to C# and onto others. :)

ds2643 9y ago
I've tried OCaml, which I absolutely loved. I'd considered approaching F# before, since the language seems promising from a functional perspective, but I'm skeptical of the multiparadigm claim. In your experience, is F#'s OOP support beginner friendly? Also, is there decent literature available on F# as an OOP language?
- pryelluw 9y ago
  Python is more beginner friendly, but lacks many of the enterprise patterns others have. Its a good intro though. The OOP docs for F# are average (not amazing). Feel free to email me!

AlexAMEEE 9y ago

I wrote many lines about Scala but then I lost the motivation to finish it. So I'll just write, Scala.

solomatov 9y ago

C# or Java. Most of the best OOP books are written for these languages.

Lordarminius 9y ago

Ruby. Use David Black's The Well grounded Rubyist or the PickAxe Book

git-pull 9y ago

I don't know if it's best, but I took on OOP in little bites: - ECMAScript 5 Mixins, scopes, instance variables, and instantiation. As a bonus, but not OOP, callbacks. It's a straight-forward language that's available abundance. - Python For it's class inheritance being easy to navigate. Instance variables, instantiation, method resolution order (MRO), mixins. - C++ This is the hardest language I can think of. It does everything OOP, and more, including allowing for a lot of stuff that's not legible. Despite that, it's a solid language. Something that goes great with constraining the many features of C++ are https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html or https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines. I think ES5 and Python are used very often and in terms of bang for the buck, give they cover a lot of the bread and butter OOP concepts.

panic 9y ago
C++ doesn't do everything OOP: it doesn't support the late bound message-send style OOP of Smalltalk at all. In particular, you can't implement #doesNotUnderstand: (http://wiki.c2.com/?DoesNotUnderstand http://wiki.c2.com/?DoesNotUnderstand) or replace one object with another unless they have a superclass-subclass relationship.
- git-pull 9y ago
  It's the first time I heard of #doesNotUnderstand Despite it looking cool and useful, IMO it's more of a (quite pleasant) sugar than an OOP concept. There's also a try/catch example where you'd get similar behavior. I feel this is a bit opinionated: > "but this is clearly rather verbose and it has to be repeated for every call." I think the example in the link is what try/catch is meant for. Message passing systems in C/C++ handle situations where a disabled/unavailable service receives communication and recovers. As for C++ and replacing objects: I feel this is also a language-specific gotcha that doesn't hinder a learner understanding OOP. But C++ has many more gotchas than that. For instance, there's no pure "interface" keyword. It can still be done (and is), code example: https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#Ri-abstract https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines..., how Google Style guide defines it: https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Interfaces https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Interfaces

probinso 9y ago

The problem is that your programming is styled by the language you choose. If you decide to go down the route of python then the curse of consenting adults will paint the way you believe object-oriented programming should be done. Likewise if you select something like C++ or Java, then the curse of privacy will paint the way you think about object-oriented programming. The curse of privacy dictates that the existence of a public method will act as documentation for an object. methods only exists for the purpose of Performing operations on that objects type. This will make you think a lot more about how objects systems provide secure and well dictated data flow. Your objects will be authored to respect these ideas. The curse of consenting adults dictates that human readable code trumps control flow. The idea of inheriting from a dictionary in Python to Define your own class object makes for extremely powerful objects that are immediately designed to interface with the Python language. There however may be operations that can be applied to dictionaries that you may not want applied to your objects. If you really want to understand object-oriented programming, then you should use both. You should find as many programming languages as possible and explore how their idioms paint the color of your code. I expect this isn't a preferred answer, but the real message is if you pick one and learn it, don't stop there. It will take you time to become comfortable enough to Warrant breaking into another language. That all being said, python and ruby are easier as a programming languages (in general) than many Alternatives. So if you have to learn programming at the same time as object-oriented programming they aren't bad choices.

mhh__ 9y ago

<plug> D is a very nicely language for doing OOP in</plug>