4 ms·

I agree 100%. Maps and lists are good workhorse objects. You don't need to clutter up your projects with lots of custom objects that do nothing more than tran

by russell 18y ago

I agree 100%. Maps and lists are good workhorse objects. You don't need to clutter up your projects with lots of custom objects that do nothing more than transport data. Add to that the over use of inheritance, abstract classes, and interfaces an you get impenetrable clutter. Throw in frameworks and all their XML glue an a simple bug fix become a heroic quest.

stcredzero 18y ago
If procedural programming is simpler for you, then do it that way! If you have lots of objects that are just glorified structs, then you are factoring badly. I have been in lots of projects. Not all OO is like that. Apparently, yours is. (Oh, and XML glue should be considered a "Framework Smell!")
- jimbokun 18y ago
  "(Oh, and XML glue should be considered a "Framework Smell!")" How about object relational glue? JSON glue? HTML template glue? Google Protocol Buffer glue? (Sure I am missing lots of others.) I do not know how you go about modern web programming without lots of glue that takes some square data and transforms it into some round data for some other piece of software, be it a browser, a client of your web service, a relational database that has data you cannot live without, etc. etc.