This. The obsession for object oriented in the '00s has made immense, irreparable damage to an entire generation of developers. I have to fight every day to kee

This. The obsession for object oriented in the '00s has made immense, irreparable damage to an entire generation of developers. I have to fight every day to keep our codebase sane against new entries that are still following that cargo cult that "everything must have an interface". I literally had an argument a few days ago with a junior that was dead set on saying that writing single-purpose functions in a C++ namespace was bad. In his own opinion "that should be a class or at least a static member function"... It's basically as if most developers have a natural tendency to writing all code as if it was Java - because they have learnt so many "patterns" that only make sense in a Java world. The irony is that often they do not realise that Java is not, in fact, a "proper" object-oriented programming language (like Smalltalk for instance), but rather a formalisation of all those quirky hacks C++ implemented [1]. [1]: I recommend "Design and Evolution of C++" by Stroustrup - it's a great insight on how lots of things we now give for granted in "modern OOP" were actually hacks he had to introduce in order to merge Simula's model with C.