Interesting and Humour - page 4550

 

.

 

Opinion: object-oriented programming is a trillion-dollar disaster

According to many, OOP is the crown jewel of computer science. The perfect solution for organizing code. The end of all problems. The only true way to write programs. Given to us by the true programming God.

But it is not. People begin to succumb under the weight of abstractions and a complex graph of haphazardly separable modifiable objects. Precious time and energy is wasted thinking about abstractions and design patterns instead of solving real-world problems. Many people criticize object-oriented programming, including very prominent software developers. Even the inventor of this paradigm himself is known for his criticism of modern OOP.


Мнение: объектно-ориентированное программирование — катастрофа на триллион долларов
Мнение: объектно-ориентированное программирование — катастрофа на триллион долларов
  • 2019.09.04
  • Klara Oswald
  • tproger.ru
Мнение редакции может не совпадать с мнением автора оригинала. По мнению многих, ООП является жемчужиной информатики. Идеальное решение для организации кода. Конец всем проблемам. Единственный верный способ написания программ. Дарован нам самим истинным Богом программирования. Но это не так. Люди начинают уступать под тяжестью абстракций и...
 
СанСаныч Фоменко:

////


Opinion: functions in programming are a trillion dollar disaster


All code should be written in one piece!

And... Arrays must not be used, only variables; otherwise the programmer will be out of control.

And now that we are doing away with OOP we should return to single-task operating systems. After all, a program which works in parallel and independently is a program object as well. It should not be possible to run several instances of one program - this is k a t a s t r o f a.

And this... https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_фобий - it is time to add another one - oopophobia.

 

Speaking of birds...

Another advantage of OOP opens up when you have to pass a lot of parameters to a function. A small thing, but still.

 
Dmitry Fedoseev:

Opinion: functions in programming are a trillion dollar disaster


All code should be written in one piece!

And... You may not use arrays, only variables; otherwise the program will be out of the programmer's control.

And now that we are doing away with OOP we should return to single-task operating systems. After all, a program which works in parallel and independently is a program object as well. It should not be possible to run several instances of one program - this is k a t a s t r o f a.

And this...https://ru. wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_фобий - it is time to add another one - oopophobia.

You're writing nonsense, it's like you haven't read to the end.

No one has ever written in one piece: functional programming is functional because it requires breaking up text into functions. The ideal of a function is that it must fit ALL of its text on the screen.

Arrays and beyond have always been around, long before OOP.

Multitasking OS's appeared in the early 70's.

Today, in R (I just don't know another one), parallel running of multiple function instances is standard in functional programming. Moreover, you can run just pieces of code in parallel - I use it myself. But how to run an "object" in parallel is a question, I can't remember, most likely you can't.

And lastly.

Open the µl documentation and look at the table of contents - the list of functions.

 
Dmitry Fedoseev:

Speaking of birds...

Another advantage of OOP opens up when you have to pass a lot of parameters to a function. A small thing, but still.

In R there is no problem with passing parameters: you can pass them one by one, you can group them into more complex ones of different types, you can pass a function as a parameter, you can pass the environment (including CPU type, OS version...) in which the program is to be executed, as a parameter.

Finish reading the article.

 
СанСаныч Фоменко:

You're writing nonsense; it's as if you haven't read to the end.

No one has ever written in one piece: functional programming is functional because it requires breaking up text into functions. The ideal of a function is that it must fit ALL of its text on the screen.

Arrays and beyond have always been around, long before OOP.

Multitasking OS's appeared in the early 70's.

Today, in R (I just don't know another one), parallel running of multiple function instances is standard in functional programming. Moreover, you can run just pieces of code in parallel - I use it myself. But how to run an "object" in parallel is a question, I can't remember, most likely you can't.

And lastly.

Open documentation on µl and look at the table of contents - the list of functions.

I haven't even started reading it. Read all the authors with a screwed-up roof - the reader will fall off.

So there were arrays before, so what?

So what if a multitasking operating system appeared in the 1970s? OOP was around even earlier. Multitasking means that the operating system loads the same program into memory a second (and third... etc.) time, the same thing that is done in OOP.

Tu-dunn! If we know nothing but R... what can we talk about?

 
СанСаныч Фоменко:

In R there is no problem with passing parameters: you can pass them one by one, you can group them into more complex ones of the same type, you can pass a function as a parameter, you can pass the environment (including CPU type, OS version...) in which the program is to be executed as a parameter.

Finish reading the article.

Aha... You can group it together after all...

Those bits of OOP that are understandable are good, right? And those that are not clear are bad, right?

 
There's a separate topic about oop. Please go there.
 
Dmitry Fedoseev:

I haven't even started reading. To read all the authors with a screwed-up head would make the reader fall off.


You're always right.

I'm out of here, and the advice comes in handy.

Reason: