3 ms·

I feel that OO imposes some semblance of structure using an intuitive semantics most "average" developers can grok (Not crazy stuff like Monads) , thereby allo

I feel that OO imposes some semblance of structure using an intuitive semantics most "average" developers can grok (Not crazy stuff like Monads) , thereby allowing Pointy Haired Bosses to treat devs as commodities to be replaced at will. Java is a language right at the sweet spot on that continuum. Just advanced enough to prevent most stupid bugs but also mediocre enough that most devs can grok it. In the words of one of its creators : "We managed to drag them half way to Lisp" And how would you program an enterprise Java App without object orientation ?

willismichael 12y ago
Why does an enterprise app have to be implemented in Java (or any other language with similar semantics)? Just because you can doesn't necessarily mean that it's the best way.
codygman 12y ago
> (Not crazy stuff like Monads) Read this and tell me that "crazy stuff like Monads" is an accurate statement: http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/marktoberdorf/baastad.pdf http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/marktoberdorf/ba...