Tet's Journal: On coding

Object orientation and code readability are mostly mutually exclusive.

Legos

[jawtheshark]

I always compared OOP to building with Lego bricks... However, do keep in mind how your floor looks prior to building anything... Ah, and there's always some blocks left, that should have been used... somewhere....

Mod this up.

[mekkab]

I've seen it done right; I've seen it done incorrectly by very smart people.

Re:

[tomhudson]

Whoa there (even if it IS Troll Tuesday) - I never EVER in my life said, or believed, that "every program must be OOP" :-p

OOP is the opposite of the "silver bullet". By letting you cover up some complexity, all you do is kick the can down the road - programs that are simple can be made conceptually simpler with OOP - programs that are past a certain point of complexity will will (de)generate into more complexity with OOP.

So in the end. the trade-off just isn't worth it.

Re:

[tomhudson]

... again, mis-characterizing what I wrote. I have never chosen "to blindly apply OOP to every problem". To the contrary, if I could, I'd spend my days writing assembler - there's simply nothing cleaner and more flexible on the planet, and it's a lot easier to recognize when you're about to shoot yourself in the foot, whereas part of the attraction of OOP is that we like to build things, and we get enamored to the act of building complexity, rather than reducing it. THIS is what is wrong with OOP.

But

Re:

[tomhudson]

Again, thanks for misinterpreting what I wrote, but so blatantly obvious that nobody will take it seriously :-)

Come on, there's still a few hours left in Tuesday - you can do better.