3 ms·
"Anything"-oriented programming is dumb. Every big problem is a collection of smaller, different problems. Different problems call for different approaches. Som
by ncmncm 4y ago
"Anything"-oriented programming is dumb. Every big problem is a collection of smaller, different problems. Different problems call for different approaches. Sometimes the best approach has data-oriented features, sometimes object, sometimes functional, sometimes piped. For big problems you want a language good at all of them.
It is why C++ continues to grow. Some complain about that, but every single feature got there over fierce opposition by making some common programming problem more tractable.
- irrational 4y agoI think this is also a reason people try to use JavaScript for so many things. As a multi-paradigm language you can do OOP, functional, etc. in it.
- sidlls 4y agoPeople try to use JavaScript for so many things because it's (surface-level) inexpensive, not because it's good at anything.
- galaxyLogic 4y agoIt is good enough
- sidlls 4y agoYes, like PHP. In so many ways.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoMind-reading and zealotry, you must be a priest. What is your denomination?
- drpyser22 4y agoIts a good thing that these paradigm exist so you know their value, and eventually understand when they're appropriate. You're right that there may not be a one-size-fits-all.
- ncmncm 4y agoSo long as you don't confuse a "paradigm" with any objective reality. Purity is for monks.
- hinkley 4y agoI wonder if Alan Kay would agree or argue with this sentiment, but it seems to me that the choice of 'oriented' was intentional and that we've consistently fucked it up ever since then. Orientation should have been 'a preference for' not 'a dogmatic adherence to'. A hot-dog based diet still contains bread, ketchup, mustard and pickles, possibly some sort of cheese. A hot dog diet is just hot dogs, which is much, much less interesting, and there is no question that it is unhealthy, whereas the former might have some plausible deniability (especially if you add beans).
- ncmncm 4y agoAlan Kay would doubtless disagree. But he would be as wrong as anybody else. Preference is silly. The problem dictates its solution. The good programmer listens to the problem.
- viktorcode 4y agoI wouldn't call C++ "good" at any of those problems. "Good enough" - maybe.
- ncmncm 4y agoNo language is good compared to those that will come after we are all of us dead. But C++ is the best we have. If any other language were to catch up and pass it, we would have another choice. But C++ is not sitting still.