Context: Some programmers they hate or are against the OOP(Object-Oriented-Programming) and sometimes against structured programming.
What do you think about that?
Do you think that the OOP is a success and good practice and technique to develop code or is all the opossite?
class fear_me{
struct stupid_monke{
...
};
};
OOP is not the problem. Abuse of OOP is.
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp
"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies
Well, like object-oriented programming (OOP), it is a bit different from structured programming, since the direction of programming something changes relatively, in it, you have to define how the bone object is going to be, its characteristics (Attributes) and its actions(methods), and then apply it or, in other words, create the object from said instructions, it may be a bit difficult and I really don't blame them, it costs me a bit, but it's actually quite good , as I want to develop video games, OOP would be very useful for me to apply it in the creation of video games, it has the potential to apply, an example would be Minecraft, in which I am sure that it is made based on OOP from the blocks to the game tools, so which I think is not bad, but a little difficult to learn and understand this topic of object-oriented programming.
P.S: The message is in Spanish translated into English, so if you find grammatical errors it is because I am not that good at languages, so I ask you to understand and understand the errors that the message may contain.
At 11/20/21 11:55 AM, ORHX wrote: Do you think that the OOP is a success and good practice and technique to develop code or is all the opossite?
Many, if not most, large scale software rely on OOP, so that's a sufficient answer for me.
A good experiment would be translate a big and complex software made e.g. in Java to C and somehow measure which version is easier to fix bugs, add new features and make breaking changes that require major refactoring.
Any hatred instilled argument you've read can be safely and completely ignored, for the sake of your productivity mostly.
O prudente varão há de ser mudo,
Que é melhor neste mundo, mar de enganos,
Ser louco c’os demais, que só, sisudo
At 1/25/22 04:39 PM, Cazaputas92 wrote: Well, like object-oriented programming (OOP), it is a bit different from structured programming, since the direction of programming something changes relatively, in it, you have to define how the bone object is going to be, its characteristics (Attributes) and its actions(methods), and then apply it or, in other words, create the object from said instructions, it may be a bit difficult and I really don't blame them, it costs me a bit, but it's actually quite good , as I want to develop video games, OOP would be very useful for me to apply it in the creation of video games, it has the potential to apply, an example would be Minecraft, in which I am sure that it is made based on OOP from the blocks to the game tools, so which I think is not bad, but a little difficult to learn and understand this topic of object-oriented programming.
P.S: The message is in Spanish translated into English, so if you find grammatical errors it is because I am not that good at languages, so I ask you to understand and understand the errors that the message may contain.
No hacia falta que me digas que eres español, tu nombre de usuario es una puta maravilla
At 1/25/22 05:37 PM, ORHX wrote:At 1/25/22 04:39 PM, Cazaputas92 wrote: Well, like object-oriented programming (OOP), it is a bit different from structured programming, since the direction of programming something changes relatively, in it, you have to define how the bone object is going to be, its characteristics (Attributes) and its actions(methods), and then apply it or, in other words, create the object from said instructions, it may be a bit difficult and I really don't blame them, it costs me a bit, but it's actually quite good , as I want to develop video games, OOP would be very useful for me to apply it in the creation of video games, it has the potential to apply, an example would be Minecraft, in which I am sure that it is made based on OOP from the blocks to the game tools, so which I think is not bad, but a little difficult to learn and understand this topic of object-oriented programming.No hacia falta que me digas que eres español, tu nombre de usuario es una puta maravilla
P.S: The message is in Spanish translated into English, so if you find grammatical errors it is because I am not that good at languages, so I ask you to understand and understand the errors that the message may contain.
XD, tambien hablas español?
Eh,
Ok so old ass programming bitch here.
Everyone loves picking a side but everyone loves picking as side on this. Both OOP and non-OOP models are entirely viable and in some cases better suited to certain problems.
The main criticisms I hear of OOP in say... c++ or c# are that the simplification of inheritance doesn't scale. As you add more stuff you're more likely to need to refactor old things and create compromises on design. But this is largely a sign you're abusing it and setting yourself up for problems.
One more valid critism of OOP is that it's honestly... not that good for performance because it's very divorced from the hardware works. While it's a valid concern... you can solve these problems in a non-oop way without converting your whole project.
Ultimately if you do OOP or non-OOP to an extreme you can shoot yourself in the foot. It's best to find what works easiest for you then refine it slowly.
Unless you are making something that requires a valid reason to choose anything else over OOP; it really doesn't matter.
The debate between OOP vs ECS or whatever is like the windows vs linux debate and the facts are that both have their own strengths, weaknesses and use cases and at the end of the day all of them will do the same exact thing that you want to do; Just a bit differently.
You just have to figure out which one is the best for what you want to do.
yes
