There's a 2018 update/rehash here: https://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2018/04/13/FPvsOO.html https://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2018/04/13/FPvsOO.html N

There's a 2018 update/rehash here: https://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2018/04/13/FPvsOO.html https://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2018/04/13/FPvsOO.html Not that it adds any value, it's exactly as confused and pointless. Uncle Bob is getting old. He tries to find defining characteristics of OO, and ends up talking gibberish: > The behavior [of o.f()] is dependent upon the type of o. i.e. f is polymorphic. Nope, behavior of a "polymorphic" invocation depends on the value of the 'o' argument. (Types don't exist at runtime.) This happens all the time in FP, where passing around functions is normal. > The mechanism of polymorphism must not create a source code dependency from the caller to the callee. That's called a higher order function. You pass a function from module A to a HOF from module B. B ends up calling into A without a source code dependency. Big deal. > What is FP? > referential transparency Lispers would object. My take on it is that the essence of FP is higher order functions. If you don't have them, you need Design Patterns instead. If you do have HOFs, you don't see why anyone would bother with OO. Bottom line: OO doesn't exist. It's just pointless jargon that only exists to make a difference without a distinction (e.g. between Smalltalk and Scheme), and possibly to sell books and Clean Code seminars.