4 ms·
OOP isn't perfect, it is just the least imperfect among alternatives. Something better will come along, but FP ain't it. Because OOP maps well to how humans thi
by petilon 5y ago
OOP isn't perfect, it is just the least imperfect among alternatives. Something better will come along, but FP ain't it. Because OOP maps well to how humans think, "something better" is going to be refinements of OOP as opposed to total replacement of it.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bcrosby95 5y agoIf you do OOP how "humans think", then you are likely doing it wrong. This is why OOD produced by both novice and intermediate experienced devs tends to suck, moreso than other programming paradigms.
- deltaonefour 5y agoI have a set of tasks for someone to complete. How would I record those tasks on paper? I certainly don't use OOP or FP. I write it as a list of procedures. From this common use case we can know that Procedural programming is the default way humans think.
- pseudosavant 5y agoAll humans don't think alike though do they? I'd sum up my unintentional journey from OO to FP as the realization that I'm not smart enough to do non-FP. Not saying OO is "wrong", but that maybe it maps better to your mental model than it does mine. I can easily jump into a more functional oriented codebase and reason about functions with clear input/output and no side-effects. The realtime REPL compiler in my brain can track the private state of functions. And while not all functions can be 'pure', most can be. With OO? Forget about it. Side-effects everywhere, that often aren't obvious when you are new to a codebase. And when I say "new" I mean it as in "not currently very familiar with". Which includes code I had written myself - years ago - that I have to relearn.