Joe Is Wrong (2009)

Joe Is Wrong (2009)
goran.krampe.se

There are a bunch of topics like this, in my own area you see the same four or five topics come up repeatedly with nothing new or interesting said on them.

I'm kind of intrigued if anyone has any thoughts on how to shock life back into these zombie debates?

I'm surprised that the original anti-Object Oriented Programming article says "data structures and functions should not be bound together" since in functional programming (if we take that as the extreme opposite of OO) they are still kinda bound together. Like if you have a JS array ['cricket', 'football', 'badminton'] it is both data and almost like a function at the same time, since you can iterate through the items and make code execute for each

For example in a webpage if there is a div id=football then you can select it using:

['cricket', 'football', 'badminton'].forEach(function (i) { document.getElementById(i); } );

In my mind this type of code really blurs the line between variables and functions

I would like to see someone do a language that enforces all of the OO paradigms and best practices on the programmer, just to see what the resulting code would look like and behave.

For instance, I'd love to see a compiler than throws a error if you violate the single responsibility principle. Much of the OO spaghetti code I've seen have been because objects are basically just structs with methods and 10 different ways and object could change state.

For practical purposes I doubt I'd ever use such a strict language, but it would be interesting to see if the result is safer and clear code. I suspect it's more code though.

Sounds boring, but judgement is what the work is about. When you're talking about a specific system you can say "I think we should use OO for this" because so-and-so. But each system needs its own explanation.