3 ms·
And very fortunately so. 'Pure' OO is the madness that created Java. Encapsulation is overrated. So overrated that you need another fancy concept like 'depend
by Shorel 14y ago
And very fortunately so. 'Pure' OO is the madness that created Java.
Encapsulation is overrated. So overrated that you need another fancy concept like 'dependency injection' when it just gets in the way.
The static function is simple and because of that, it is good.
- eru 14y agotabbyjabby didn't say it's bad. They just said it's not OO.
- Shorel 14y agoI know. It implies the assumption that not complying with OO is something code should avoid as a rule of thumb. I'm the one saying that strict OO is bad because it's verbose and its slower than the alternative.
- hdctambien 14y agoI think it more implies that object oriented things should be called OO and not-object-oriented things should be called something that isn't OO.
- eru 14y agoCount me in as saying that not only strict OO is bad, but OO is a bad idea in general. At least in its usual form. You might manage to tackle something OO-like on, say, FP, and get away with it.