3 ms·
I don't believe that the problem is OO in itself, but the way in which it is often used. You can write a bad program in any paradigm, and a good one too. FP is
by charlysl 9y ago
I don't believe that the problem is OO in itself, but the way in which it is often used. You can write a bad program in any paradigm, and a good one too.
FP is less popular and tends to attract a more curious crowd, who is more willing to learn how to use it well, whereas OO languages are used by everyone.
On top of that, OO is build on top of a more expressive computation model, the stateful one, which because of its power is much more difficult to use well (and easier to abuse) than the much simpler functional/declarative model.
- Tomis02 9y ago> I don't believe that the problem is OO in itself, but the way in which it is often used. That's similar to what proponents of communism have been saying - "it does work if you do it right". The problem is that things start breaking down as soon as the project scale. For small programs a pure OO model can work, but increased complexity means people will definitely switch to a hybrid OO-(procedural|functional) style, simply because pure OO is untenable in large codebases.
- charlysl 9y agoHaha, communism. Communism failed in Russia. But democracy failed in Russia too. Was communism the problem? I am half kidding, but I have wondered sometimes ...