Fuck OOP

I'm stuck in an IRC channel of retards thinking OOP is the greatest thing since sliced bread. EXPERT PROGRAMMERS use languages which can implement their own object system, and have no need for such useless bloat. Let's face it; people who love OOP, love it because it allows them to think they're being productive. Fuck you fags and fuck your fucking shitty paradigm.

"BAD PROGRAMMERS SAY INTERFACES ARE USELESS. HUR HUR HUR"

yeah oops fags feel productive typing out getter/setter routines really fast all day.. fucking idiots piss me off too

HEY GUYS. I'VE JUST READ DESIGN PATTERNS! BEST BOOK EVER! WOULD YOU LIKE SOME UML WITH THAT?

SINGLETON
FACTORY
ABSTRACT FACTORY
REGSITRY
MVC
FACADE

OH HI I'M RUBY

THE NUMBER 2 IS AN OBJECT

I AM UNIQUE AND BRILLIANT AND JAPANESE THEREFORE AWESOME

Getter/setters are a sign you're doing it wrong. :(

Besides, if you just have to use them, use a language with properties. Then you can access the attributes like you would a struct, without worrying too much about future changes.

Most of the times, OOP is overrated, and OOP languages are bloated pieces of shit, if not braindead and broken in several parts, like Java. People, especially managers, think OOP is some sort of panacea which is more correct, more productive and more maintainable than other approaches, and I estimate that 50%-67% of the times they are wrong. Each problem is different and different paradigms fit different programs. The most productive language is the one that doesn't shove OOP up your ass, but allows you to design your own object system (and provides a working one as an additional feature) and allows you to use the appropriate tools for the job, mixing imperative, OOP, functional and declarative programming, and maybe providing additional features such as easy domain-specific language creation.

I like OOP for what it's good at, but I don't understand why do ENTERPRISE morons get so excited with it. They just got to fap over it like they do over XML, SOAP, and all that. Just magazine/"blog" hype. They could just as easily have taken any other feature, such as continuations or regular expressions, build a whole industry around it, get obsessed with it, and end up misusing it most of the time.

>>3
Ah, design patterns. More enterprise bullshit. Glorified copypasta. Enterprise faggots managed to convert the questionable practice of copypasta into a Best Practice™, selling books and writing bullshit articles in the process. Enhance your business with design patterns. They include the most retarded forced OOP crap ever, which should be the very examples of where not to use OOP.

>>5
This man understands OOP.

>>6
I'll use declarative programming to fix a mistake in my post:
s/(?<=different paradigms fit different )programs/problems/

I don't know very much about OOP but what I especially like about C++ over C is, that you can have both, methods and attributes inside classes. No polymorphism and all that, just nicely structured methods and attributes. Winapi and other non OOP libraries suck ass because they just throw thousands of methods, attributes, typedefs and whatever all over the place.

>>8
you don't need c++ to do that, learning to code will suffice.

Every program uses OOP these days, you can't avoid it. Sorry OP, unless you're writing a language yourself, a program yourself, or anything yourself, you will have to encounter OOP.
C is the best thing without OOP.

C is the best thing without OOP.
You said it.

>>10
Object orientation is an organised way to write shitty code.

Problem is that way too few people understand what OOP is about. C++ and Java are disasters, they are so far from proper OOP languages that it's not even funny.

>>13
Yeah, what's with some data types not being classes? WHAT?

In Common Lisp, every type is an object, and all are subclasses of type T.

>>13
I'm glad at least some people in this thread seem to have got it right.

I just code procedurally and use objects for any code that needs to be reused or abstracted.

I win. Every time.

I just think about the problem and sketch up a class hierarchy before I start coding.

I win. Every time.

I program in whichever paradigm is useful for the problem.

You all fail. Every time.

>>16
See: http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1185439522/21

no u>>18

（￣へ￣） Hello. I am "Mr. Likes To Age Threads". I do believe this is a thread in need of Age, so I would like to age it. That is why my name is "Mr. Likes To Age Threads".

25 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-06 9:04

^{Back to /b/, ``GNAA Faggot''}