I view it as pendulum. I cut my teeth during the sunrise of OO doing Smalltalk, dining in the halls of Smalltalk and CLOS. And then like a religious explosion,

I view it as pendulum. I cut my teeth during the sunrise of OO doing Smalltalk, dining in the halls of Smalltalk and CLOS. And then like a religious explosion, everyone went "all in" for random and arbitrary definitions of "all in" to OO and we ended up with a huge mess. Now, everyone hates on OO. It's sad to me. While OO has been on the outs for the last 10ish years, I feel like we've been awash in the other side of the coin. Instead of "all objects all the way down" we get all "all functions (and monads)" all the way down. There seems to be two "middle of the road" paths out of this. You either get "multi paradigm" approaches where you get incomplete and difficult to reconcile partial implementations of a smorgasboard of the author's preferences and formative experiences writ large. The other is the less popular but kind of "let's just be pragmatic" approaches like Elixir/Erlang. Personally, I'm finding the latter more appealing. Multi paradigm languages create a "too many knobs" problem when solving problems. The simpler, pragmatic, but sometimes kind of kludgy/goofy languages allow me to just solve problems (even if I have to jump through a couple of hoops some times), instead of wondering which hoops are the best hoops to jump through.