Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

blog.pivotal.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 126 posts

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#22

Post by flipp3r »

radu_floricica wrote: post #8

Depends on how you use it, of course. Libraries make wonderful showcases for OOP strengths - I always like to give Java Collections as an example. But if you actually build your application code as OOP... well, I might privately think you deserve everything that happens to you because of that. I think education carries most of the guilt for this. The typical examples given in OOS classes are stuff like Car is an ance…

But aren't beans just maps with additional constraints on the data..?

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#23

Post by mtrn »

Zed Shaw talked about experiences teaching programming in this LXTHW series. I cannot cite the exact source right now, but in essence he said, that novices grasp all concepts up to OOP, where there is no more analogy in computer architecture and people seem to get stuck.

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#25

Post by JupiterMoon »

Humanity has to accept that half of any population (including the team in our current workplace) is less intelligent than the other half. Then when we address a problem we have to accept that both halves will have to touch the problem at some stage in a project. Following this we need to aim for simplicity rather than complexity. With this in mind I think that both FP and OOP can be used to build simpler programs but that OOP has in the past failed in doing this.

Basically I think we need to use tooling (in which I include languages and paradigms) that aim to come with less foot-guns and more safety rails.

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#26

Post by mtrn »

sedlich wrote: post #3

What probably scares me most is, that managers think OO is in general a wonderful best practice you need to have in the company...

This is a very general problem. As a organizational unit, you need to follow a path, but if it is difficult to determine the source of your problems in the first place, many things will sound like solutions.

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#28

Post by jbnicolai »

PythonicAlpha wrote: post #12
sedlich wrote: post #3

What probably scares me most is, that managers think OO is in general a wonderful best practice you need to have in the company...

Managers who think, there is a silver bullet, always scare me!

    So close to haiku,
    only one more syllable,
    great embarrassment.

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#29

Post by danmaz74 »

Does anybody know of any language that supports OO, but that lets you declare pure functions/methods - enforcing that those pure functions/methods only use other pure functions, don't use global objects, etc? Lately we're adopting Redux [1] together with React and the idea of being able to mix functional and OO in a better way looks more and more interesting to me.

[1] https://github.com/rackt/redux

Re: All evidence points to OOP being bullshit (2013)

#30

Post by n0us »

dmvaldman wrote: post #24

[Shameless plug] For a philosophical interpretation on the differences between OOP and FP, you may enjoy my gist: Descartes, Berkeley and Functional Reactive Programming https://gist.github.com/dmvaldman/f957dd9a8ed3f6edf35d

It's actually a common misquote of Descartes to say "I think therefore I am." A more proper translation is "I think, I am" which has significant implications for his philosophy.
Post reply on HN