3 ms·

> OO cowboys will want to have a whole polymorphic soup of collaborating objects. Say no to the OO-ist. When you nest and branch conditionals, all you need to d

> OO cowboys will want to have a whole polymorphic soup of collaborating objects. Say no to the OO-ist. When you nest and branch conditionals, all you need to do is read the code from top to bottom. Like a great novel, one simple linear prose of code. With the OO-overboard paradigm, it's like a terrible choose-your-own-adventure kid's book. You're constantly flipping between classes and juggling patterns and so many more complex concepts. Just if-things out and you'll be fine. This is meant sarcastically, but I think this is actually one example of where a lot of backlash against OO comes from, especially in 2022.

jiggawatts 5y ago
I come from the opposite camp. I detest functions that are five pages of boolean logic, which I guarantee you contain at least a dozen bugs, no matter how much you think you've tested it. Code coverage is like those skin creams that say "Scientifically tested!" on the label. Yeah, well, tested doesn't mean that it worked. It just means that there was a test. Watch this video of Andrei Alexandrescu's talk in CppCon 2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIb3L4vKZ7U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIb3L4vKZ7U I've done things like this in my career, and it's always worked out brilliantly. Bugs just evaporate when you let the compiler "combine" things for you, instead of just plopping everything into a bowl and mashing it together with your hands like some sort of animal. Especially in today's C++ or Rust, you can "have your cake and eat it too". It's possible to build up these nice, single-purpose class hierarchies and combine them into complex, powerful constructs via templates / traits. The compiler takes care of the edge cases for you, because it never gets bored or distracted. There's no performance downside because of static dispatch, inlining, and aggressive optimisers.
- rmbyrro 5y ago
  But having a function spanning five pages isn't smart practice, regardless of OOP or Functional style.
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  Well, usually the way to avoid a 5 pages function is by encapsulating concepts away into self-contained code. It is not by encapsulating it away into code colocated with state. OOP is not the answer here. Class hierarchies can be, as long as they are not OOP and "classes" are just synonym for "modules". Code and data colocation has its uses, but it's normally best fit for interface layers than internal code.

jiggawatts 5y ago

I come from the opposite camp. I detest functions that are five pages of boolean logic, which I guarantee you contain at least a dozen bugs, no matter how much you think you've tested it. Code coverage is like those skin creams that say "Scientifically tested!" on the label. Yeah, well, tested doesn't mean that it worked. It just means that there was a test. Watch this video of Andrei Alexandrescu's talk in CppCon 2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIb3L4vKZ7U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIb3L4vKZ7U I've done things like this in my career, and it's always worked out brilliantly. Bugs just evaporate when you let the compiler "combine" things for you, instead of just plopping everything into a bowl and mashing it together with your hands like some sort of animal. Especially in today's C++ or Rust, you can "have your cake and eat it too". It's possible to build up these nice, single-purpose class hierarchies and combine them into complex, powerful constructs via templates / traits. The compiler takes care of the edge cases for you, because it never gets bored or distracted. There's no performance downside because of static dispatch, inlining, and aggressive optimisers.

rmbyrro 5y ago
But having a function spanning five pages isn't smart practice, regardless of OOP or Functional style.
marcosdumay 5y ago
Well, usually the way to avoid a 5 pages function is by encapsulating concepts away into self-contained code. It is not by encapsulating it away into code colocated with state. OOP is not the answer here. Class hierarchies can be, as long as they are not OOP and "classes" are just synonym for "modules". Code and data colocation has its uses, but it's normally best fit for interface layers than internal code.