Image not available

619x337

pic-selected-2407....png

๐Ÿงต Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16303123

How come any time someone tries to apply the scientific method to object oriented programming and SOLID "design patterns" the claimed benefits never materialize?
Is OOP beyond science?

Anonymous No. 16303126

oops meant to post this on /g/, but the point still stands.

Anonymous No. 16303244

>>16303123
>Create the most powerful programming language (Lisp) in the 1960s
>computer "scientists" ignore it and make garbage for the next half century.

Anonymous No. 16303247

>>16303244
>the most powerful programming language in the 1960s
C was created in the 70s though?

Anonymous No. 16303251

>>16303247
How is C more powerful than Lisp? Or is this one of those shitty /g/ memes

Anonymous No. 16303254

/g/ tier thread
But OOP is good in theory bad in practice.

Anonymous No. 16303316

>>16303123
OOP is so you can be easily replaced by diversity hires and foreigners.

Anonymous No. 16303325

>>16303254
>bad in theory worse in practice
fixed

Anonymous No. 16303329

>>16303251
Cause c doesn't force useless features on you

Anonymous No. 16303364

>>16303251
>(((LISP)))
A design of the language itself lets you know why it's garbage.

Anonymous No. 16303444

>>16303244
A closure is just an instance of an object with one method.

Anonymous No. 16303457

>>16303123
Do you really think each dogbreed needs own datatype?

Anonymous No. 16304259

>>16303244
Sure, it must be why they named their language after a speech impediment.

Anonymous No. 16305283

>>16303123
>CS
>science
pick one

Anonymous No. 16305716

>>16303123
Is the pic from a talk related to the topic or just a random pic?

Anonymous No. 16306298

>>16303123
>Is OOP beyond science?
i have seen inheritance trees so deep, it made me believe satan is real

Anonymous No. 16306957

>>16306298
Are you aware that inheritance is only for typechecking otherwise it's useless?