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

The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

dpc.pw

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 252 posts

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#2

Post by adnzzzzZ »

>The vast majority of essential code is not operating on just one object – it is actually implementing cross-cutting concerns. Example: when class Player hits() a class Monster, where exactly do we modify data? Monster's hp has to decrease by Player's attackPower, Player's xps increase by Monster's level if Monster got killed. Does it happen in Player.hits(Monster m) or Monster.isHitBy(Player p). What if there's a class Weapon involved? Do we pass it as an argument to isHitBy or does Player has a currentWeapon() getter?

As an indie dev this is something that I struggled with early on and my solution so far has been to choose the most obvious place where all those things should happen and just do it there (in this case it would be on the Player, in other less obvious cases it gets more fuzzy). What does the non-OOP solution for this problem look like?

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#3

Post by jdub »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #2

>The vast majority of essential code is not operating on just one object – it is actually implementing cross-cutting concerns. Example: when class Player hits() a class Monster, where exactly do we modify data? Monster's hp has to decrease by Player's attackPower, Player's xps increase by Monster's level if Monster got killed. Does it happen in Player.hits(Monster m) or Monster.isHitBy(Player p). What if there's a cl…

Entity-Component-System, amusingly explained in this great talk from RustConf.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKLntZcp27M

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#4

Post by krapht »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #2

>The vast majority of essential code is not operating on just one object – it is actually implementing cross-cutting concerns. Example: when class Player hits() a class Monster, where exactly do we modify data? Monster's hp has to decrease by Player's attackPower, Player's xps increase by Monster's level if Monster got killed. Does it happen in Player.hits(Monster m) or Monster.isHitBy(Player p). What if there's a cl…

It looks like a bunch of flat, 2d tables like you might find in a spreadsheet or database.

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#5

Post by adnzzzzZ »

jdub wrote: post #3
adnzzzzZ wrote: post #2

>The vast majority of essential code is not operating on just one object – it is actually implementing cross-cutting concerns. Example: when class Player hits() a class Monster, where exactly do we modify data? Monster's hp has to decrease by Player's attackPower, Player's xps increase by Monster's level if Monster got killed. Does it happen in Player.hits(Monster m) or Monster.isHitBy(Player p). What if there's a cl…

Entity-Component-System, amusingly explained in this great talk from RustConf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKLntZcp27M

That solution is more burdensome than OOP

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#6

Post by eitland »

I read this quickly to see if this was the piece that should convince me.

It was not. It is, IMO, a collection of strawmen.

People have abused OOP? Yes.

But

- citing FizzBuzz Enterprise Edition (which is really funny even for us Java/.Net developers because it is so horribly wrong)

or writing this

- Because OOP requires scattering everything across many, many tiny encapsulated objects, the number of references to these objects explodes as well. OOP requires passing long lists of arguments everywhere or holding references to related objects directly to shortcut it.

again IMO, demonstrate that the author never really understood OOP.

What probably is true however is that a lot of people should unlearn the OOP they learned in school.

Re: The faster you unlearn OOP, the better for you and your software

#9

Post by bvrmn »

eitland wrote: post #6

I read this quickly to see if this was the piece that should convince me. It was not. It is, IMO, a collection of strawmen. People have abused OOP? Yes. But - citing FizzBuzz Enterprise Edition (which is really funny even for us Java/.Net developers because it is so horribly wrong) or writing this - Because OOP requires scattering everything across many, many tiny encapsulated objects, the number of references to the…

> What probably is true however is that a lot of people should unlearn the OOP they learned in school.

Can you provide references for proper OOP?

Post reply on HN