4 ms·

Having programmed a lot of OO in Python and PHP (yeah, yeah, I know, but its OO implementation is actually rather good), I always felt OO was a pretty good way

by zorbo 12y ago

Having programmed a lot of OO in Python and PHP (yeah, yeah, I know, but its OO implementation is actually rather good), I always felt OO was a pretty good way of doing things... Until I hit the Java scene. Boy, is it a big mess. There I found some of the worst unreadable, unmaintainable, ungrokable, complex and brittle code I've ever seen. And that's not an exception, rather it's the standard. I suddenly understood why Python's logging implementation is such a disaster. It was ported from Java. I'm sorry if this offends the java programmers, but it feels like idiomatic java is just abstractions piled on abstractions upon patterns, in the hope of somehow making things more understandable or robust. It doesn't. I've always thought of OO as simply abstraction and encapsulation. Functions on steroids, if you will. If something doesn't fit the OO paradigm, I don't try to shoehorn it in (which patterns seem to especially made for). If you manage to avoid doing that, OO works rather well if you ask me.

chriswarbo 12y ago
One of the major points of the article is the "no True OO Programmer" fallacy: this is my experience whenever I argue against Object Oriented Programming (OOP): no matter what evidence I bring up for consideration, it is dismissed as irrelevant. If I complain that Java is verbose, I’m told that True OOP Programmers let the IDE take care of some of the boilerplate, or perhaps I am told that Scala is better. If I complain that Scala involves too much ceremony, I’m told that Ruby lacks ceremony. If I complain about the dangers of monkey-patching in Ruby, I’m told that True OOP Programmers know how to use the meta-programming to their advantage, and if I can’t do it then I am simply incompetent. I should use a language that is more pure, or a language that is more practical, I should use a language that has compile-time static data-type checking, or I should use a language that gives me the freedom of dynamic typing. If I complain about bugginess, I’m told that those specific bugs have been fixed in the new version, why haven’t I upgraded, or I’m told there is a common workaround, and I’m an idiot if I didn’t know about it. If I complain that the most popular framework is bloated, I’m told that no one uses that framework any more. No True OOP Programmer ever does whatever it is that I’m complaining about.
- davelnewton 12y ago
  The same goes the opposite direction, though. While I'm sure your actual arguments are more cogent, simply complaining about something specific isn't an argument against OOP in general. And I doubt that anybody claims Java isn't verbose, or that the IDE "handles" it--regardless of who's doing the typing, Java is verbose. The only people that hold up Java as a good example of OOP are people that don't really know any other version.
  - tpresa 12y ago
    He does argue that OOP introduces complexity without any unique strengths.
    - davelnewton 12y ago
      Are you referring to the OP's post? That part of it is simply incorrect. If you're referring to the comment I replied to, I don't see this argument in there.
- andybak 12y ago
  I think there is a similar flaw in your argument as follows. You: OO is flawed because of x Me: But OO language a doesn't have a problem with x You: Ah but language a has problems with y Me: Yes but language b doesn't etc... You conclude OO is inherently flawed I conclude that there are now languages without flaws...
  - blowski 12y ago
    Exactly. If you look for a language without flaws, you may as well give up programming. On the other hand, if you say "I'm trying to do X - what's a good language to use?" then we can have a conversation. Some of the flaws are irrelevant in some projects, but roadblocks in others. Debating the pros and cons of languages without the context of a project is like discussing the best form of transport without having any idea of the journey.
peterashford 12y ago
It's amazing that Java powers all those banks and corporations given how unmaintainable, ungrokable, complex and brittle it is. The fools.
cturner 12y ago
What are examples of a good approaches to generic logging? In the past I've found log4j and the python stdlib logging to be frustrating to work with. But when I had a shot at writing my own approaches, I found it to be one of those domains that's harder to deal with than it looks. Someone will have though - interested to know of a good approach.
- MrDosu 12y ago
  There are multiple approaches (my favs being dependency injection or aspect oriented). The actual case of a dependency affecting an entire application is called a "cross cutting concern", there is great literature to be found under that term that explains it better then I ever could. It highly depends on the use case though, just have it in your toolbox (and dont get in the habit of argueing when you are tasked to build a house whether you should use the hammer OR the saw like some peeps in this thread. Select the right tool for the right circumstance dont just limit yourself to one).

by zorbo 12y ago

chriswarbo 12y ago

One of the major points of the article is the "no True OO Programmer" fallacy: this is my experience whenever I argue against Object Oriented Programming (OOP): no matter what evidence I bring up for consideration, it is dismissed as irrelevant. If I complain that Java is verbose, I’m told that True OOP Programmers let the IDE take care of some of the boilerplate, or perhaps I am told that Scala is better. If I complain that Scala involves too much ceremony, I’m told that Ruby lacks ceremony. If I complain about the dangers of monkey-patching in Ruby, I’m told that True OOP Programmers know how to use the meta-programming to their advantage, and if I can’t do it then I am simply incompetent. I should use a language that is more pure, or a language that is more practical, I should use a language that has compile-time static data-type checking, or I should use a language that gives me the freedom of dynamic typing. If I complain about bugginess, I’m told that those specific bugs have been fixed in the new version, why haven’t I upgraded, or I’m told there is a common workaround, and I’m an idiot if I didn’t know about it. If I complain that the most popular framework is bloated, I’m told that no one uses that framework any more. No True OOP Programmer ever does whatever it is that I’m complaining about.

davelnewton 12y ago
The same goes the opposite direction, though. While I'm sure your actual arguments are more cogent, simply complaining about something specific isn't an argument against OOP in general. And I doubt that anybody claims Java isn't verbose, or that the IDE "handles" it--regardless of who's doing the typing, Java is verbose. The only people that hold up Java as a good example of OOP are people that don't really know any other version.
- tpresa 12y ago
  He does argue that OOP introduces complexity without any unique strengths.
  - davelnewton 12y ago
    Are you referring to the OP's post? That part of it is simply incorrect. If you're referring to the comment I replied to, I don't see this argument in there.
andybak 12y ago
I think there is a similar flaw in your argument as follows. You: OO is flawed because of x Me: But OO language a doesn't have a problem with x You: Ah but language a has problems with y Me: Yes but language b doesn't etc... You conclude OO is inherently flawed I conclude that there are now languages without flaws...
- blowski 12y ago
  Exactly. If you look for a language without flaws, you may as well give up programming. On the other hand, if you say "I'm trying to do X - what's a good language to use?" then we can have a conversation. Some of the flaws are irrelevant in some projects, but roadblocks in others. Debating the pros and cons of languages without the context of a project is like discussing the best form of transport without having any idea of the journey.

peterashford 12y ago

It's amazing that Java powers all those banks and corporations given how unmaintainable, ungrokable, complex and brittle it is. The fools.

cturner 12y ago

What are examples of a good approaches to generic logging? In the past I've found log4j and the python stdlib logging to be frustrating to work with. But when I had a shot at writing my own approaches, I found it to be one of those domains that's harder to deal with than it looks. Someone will have though - interested to know of a good approach.

MrDosu 12y ago
There are multiple approaches (my favs being dependency injection or aspect oriented). The actual case of a dependency affecting an entire application is called a "cross cutting concern", there is great literature to be found under that term that explains it better then I ever could. It highly depends on the use case though, just have it in your toolbox (and dont get in the habit of argueing when you are tasked to build a house whether you should use the hammer OR the saw like some peeps in this thread. Select the right tool for the right circumstance dont just limit yourself to one).