4 ms·

> I think it's safe to say that there is no "one language to rule them all" or "one programming paradigm to rule them all. Absolutely! But when OOP was initial

> I think it's safe to say that there is no "one language to rule them all" or "one programming paradigm to rule them all. Absolutely! But when OOP was initially sold to the masses it was marketed to be that one solution to rule them all, OOP was the buzzword of the day and it stayed like that for some time to come. It is only fair that the king was dethroned to make room for equally good/competing paradigms. I don't think OOP is bad but I've seen codebases where it become needlessly more complicated and complex than it should have been. The author is absolutely right in claiming that OOP is not bad if certain things are avoided when: objects are exactly not paralleling the real world, avoiding inheritance when not coding a framework/library, not creating objects unnecessarily, not overusing design patterns, etc. But since it was heavily marketed those things could not be easily escaped from and the OOP gurus kept on adding to the list. OOP is not bad but it deserve its bashing for the hype it took the world over with.

api 6y ago
I agree about OOP being marketed that way. I remember that time. Rejecting it utterly and making it an "anti-buzzword" is equally irrational. It's a tool. Use it when appropriate.
- grugagag 6y ago
  > It's a tool. Use it when appropriate. I agree it is a tool but since its definition (or multiple definitions because it appears there are many conflicted OOP philosophies out there) is not very clear and it leads to a lot of needlessly confused ways of using it. If it weren't so hyped in the first place maybe it would have evolved in a more harmonious way and it wouldn't be the subject to bashing now. I personally can use it for my projects, but I am in no way inclined to save it from bashing, it did bit me multiple times when my intuition was telling me otherwise. I guess what goes around comes around.

api 6y ago

I agree about OOP being marketed that way. I remember that time. Rejecting it utterly and making it an "anti-buzzword" is equally irrational. It's a tool. Use it when appropriate.

grugagag 6y ago
> It's a tool. Use it when appropriate. I agree it is a tool but since its definition (or multiple definitions because it appears there are many conflicted OOP philosophies out there) is not very clear and it leads to a lot of needlessly confused ways of using it. If it weren't so hyped in the first place maybe it would have evolved in a more harmonious way and it wouldn't be the subject to bashing now. I personally can use it for my projects, but I am in no way inclined to save it from bashing, it did bit me multiple times when my intuition was telling me otherwise. I guess what goes around comes around.