2 ms·

If you redefine OOP as functional composition then almost every language passes as object-oriented, including C. To me that simply doesn't make any sense though

If you redefine OOP as functional composition then almost every language passes as object-oriented, including C. To me that simply doesn't make any sense though, and I don't think it's what people would understand as object-oriented in the context of a programming language. Inheritance is a two-way relationship, i.e. if "Dog" overrides functionality in "Animal" then an internal method defined in "Animal" that calls that functionality would be dispatched to the overridden one defined in "Dog". That simply doesn't happen in Golang, hence it does not implement inheritance. C++ e.g. uses vtables for that.

bheadmaster 3y ago
> Inheritance is a two-way relationship, i.e. if "Dog" overrides functionality in "Animal" then an internal method defined in "Animal" that calls that functionality would be dispatched to the overridden one defined in "Dog". I disagree, I think that's actually bundling the concept of polymorphism with the concept of inheritance. Okay, C++ does it, but is there any other reason why inheritance must support polymorphic methods in order to be "real" inheritance? C++ uses virtual classes to achieve polymorphism through inheritance. Go simply uses interfaces. I don't see any reason why Go's approach would be "less OOP" than C++.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]