I'd like to clarify my point -- I'm not arguing against OOP or for another paradigm. What I'm saying is that "do one thing" transcends paradigm. And in fact,

I'd like to clarify my point -- I'm not arguing against OOP or for another paradigm. What I'm saying is that "do one thing" transcends paradigm. And in fact, its OOP incarnation is known as the single responsibility principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle). So when I say that "I disagree that 'do one thing' is an argument in favor of OO programming", what I'm saying is that "do one thing" is important, no matter which paradigm you choose. Neither OOP's strengths and weaknesses nor how it compares to any other paradigm are relevant to my point. I'm sorry, but saying things like but it is and the basic idea is sound and based on pragmatic thinking without a supporting argument is unconvincing.