4 ms·

Haven't you just described functional vs procedural programming?

• dathinab 6y ago
  No he described implicit arguments and mutation vs. explicit arguments and mutation. It's independent of OOP vs. functional, through it's easier to have implicit arguments and mutation in OOP so you see it more often there, especially if people somehow ended up believing that programming OOP means you need to create a class for everything and make all states a object member instead of e.g. a variable in the stack.
  • rvense 6y ago
    Yes! I often see code that where a method sets an instance variable, then calls another method that does some work based on that instance variable, which is then not used until the next time that first caller is used. The instance variable is redundant, and the control flow is obfuscated. I think the principle is just to only expose something when you really have to (harhar), and that the 70's suspicion of unstructured use of global scope should be equally directed to class scope.
    • amw-zero 6y ago
      That's called temporal coupling, where some code only works if some previous code set some variable earlier in time. And it's a sign that you're building an implicit state machine.
• valenterry 6y ago
  It's not explicitly expressed (the functions could still execute sideeffects and e.g. mutate things), but yes, that is pretty much the style that pure functional programming enforces!.