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

Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 355 posts

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#111

Post by ww520 »

Kequc wrote: post #70

OO is treated almost like a religion by some people. It's useful to be able to create instances of some things but the place OO fails is the "oriented" part. Code is much easier to maintain and understand written in a functional state. If something doesn't need to be an instance, it probably shouldn't be one. This article articulates a lot of problems I've noticed in OO code, I think it would be foolish to ignore it.…

So are anti-OO. People's anti-OO pitch often have the display of a feverish religious zeal.

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#112

Post by abrkn »

biocomputation wrote: post #106
laurentdc wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's missing "web artisan". So much self-entitlement.

>> It's missing "web artisan" Snicker. I totally love this and am stealing it from you.

Artificial[1] Programmer

[1] in the sense 'workmanship'

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#113

Post by ternaryoperator »

_gi12 wrote: post #52
aibottle wrote: post #31

God damn it I begin to hate Medium. Just another Bullshit article. When I read those dips ts description: "Software Engineer and Architect, Teacher, Writer, Filmmaker, Photographer, Artist…" Great. And you want to tell me that OO is dead and functional the only future? Fuck off.

The self-descriptions people use these days are so ludicrous it's hard to tell if it's satire. If I had a Medium account, here's how my description would read: "Software Engineer, Philanthropist, Astronaut, Shark Hunter, Breaker of Chains, Lord Commander of the Snack Bin, Protector of the Repo, and Part-time Cat Dad" Too much or just right?

"former philanthropist" would give it a kind of edgy feel

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#114

Post by Yokohiii »

Fast reading through the article I was already prepared that OP would shift to FP. OP should assess his own fallacies and not blame imperfect concepts. One can probably improve certain things switching paradigms, but we as humans fail at conception, communication and complexity (althought we can brute force the latter). There is no language that can solve this problems sanely and it is questionable that any can.

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#115

Post by vegabook »

ryanmarsh wrote: post #97

How about we just say this: OO solves a set of problems albeit with tradeoffs Functional solves a set of problems albeit with tradeoffs There. We can all go back to our tea.

yep... I was just dunking a hobnob while writing some good old imperative C. Did anybody notice that Vulkan, "the future" of graphics APIs, doesn't f*ck around with OO or Functional?

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#116

Post by david-given »

_gi12 wrote: post #52
aibottle wrote: post #31

God damn it I begin to hate Medium. Just another Bullshit article. When I read those dips ts description: "Software Engineer and Architect, Teacher, Writer, Filmmaker, Photographer, Artist…" Great. And you want to tell me that OO is dead and functional the only future? Fuck off.

The self-descriptions people use these days are so ludicrous it's hard to tell if it's satire. If I had a Medium account, here's how my description would read: "Software Engineer, Philanthropist, Astronaut, Shark Hunter, Breaker of Chains, Lord Commander of the Snack Bin, Protector of the Repo, and Part-time Cat Dad" Too much or just right?

'Part-time Cat Dad' doesn't sound plausible to me --- everyone knows that owning a cat is a full time job.

And as for 'Protector of the Repo'... basically what you're saying is that you're a repo man?

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#117

Post by lispm »

eutectic wrote: post #108
overgard wrote: post #59

Programming paradigms are a lot like political parties -- they tend to lump a lot of disparate things together with a weakly uniting theme. You don't need inheritance for encapsulation to be useful, for instance. The problem is, sometimes you agree with only a small part of the platform. None of these things individually are terrible ideas if tastefully applied, but it all gets clumped together into one big blob of "…

Except that there is a real advantage to using pure functional programming; being able to easily prove theorems about your code and understand different components in isolation. There is a reason why the majority of proof assistants are implemented as functional languages. Most functional languages even give you ways of modelling imperative code (e.g. monads) in a way which hardly sacrifices expressiveness. The real…

The real disadvantage of pure functional programming is that it is notoriously difficult to use and thus only very few programs outside specialized domains are written in them.

For example I would guess that in a typical enterprise (say, a manufacturing company), 0.0001% of the software is written in a pure functional language.

Things OO languages 'force' us seem to be relatively easy to use: sending a message to a certain object, thinking in categories (elephants, houses, chairs, moveable objects, ...), state (position, speed, size, shape),... Thus it is not surprising that the overwhelming majority of software written in the last 10 years has been written in OO languages.

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#118

Post by rsp1984 »

_gi12 wrote: post #52
aibottle wrote: post #31

God damn it I begin to hate Medium. Just another Bullshit article. When I read those dips ts description: "Software Engineer and Architect, Teacher, Writer, Filmmaker, Photographer, Artist…" Great. And you want to tell me that OO is dead and functional the only future? Fuck off.

The self-descriptions people use these days are so ludicrous it's hard to tell if it's satire. If I had a Medium account, here's how my description would read: "Software Engineer, Philanthropist, Astronaut, Shark Hunter, Breaker of Chains, Lord Commander of the Snack Bin, Protector of the Repo, and Part-time Cat Dad" Too much or just right?

Don't forget "Father of 5 Children and 8 Bastards, Environmental Activist, Feminist, Intellectual, Playing 10 Instruments and Speaking 20 Languages, More Wifes than King Solomon"

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#119

Post by skywhopper »

OO is just a way of organizing code. You can simulate quite a bit of it in non-OO languages. But a lot of the problems are universal.

OO lets you abstract away a lot of detail, but locks you into some rigidity that doesn't map perfectly onto the real world. It's a leaky abstraction. But so is _everything_ real that we attempt to represent in a computer or in any formal system. Gödel proved this 85 years ago.

Code reuse is entirely possible with OO. The practical difficulties of code dependency management are not unique to OO. Anyone who's ever developed anything non-trivial in Node has seen how insane the dependency tree can get. Every language and platform has its own version of this problem and its own solution. From Windows DLL hell to Ubuntu Snap, from Bundler to Virtualenv, this problem transcends any particular style of programming.

It's good the author is skeptical of the promises of functional programming, but the total rejection of OO concepts as useless reveals that ultimately the author didn't really learn anything useful. The author fails to address how abandoning OO solves any of the problems he claims to have. "Ew, that's gross!" is not a useful analysis.

Re: Goodbye, Object Oriented Programming

#120

Post by Nullabillity »

Stratoscope wrote: post #27
Nullabillity wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indent it with 4 spaces to make HN recognize it as a code block.

It's two spaces, but of course four works too. https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc

Whoops. Too used to Markdown, I guess.
Post reply on HN