Comment by chris_wot
Comment by chris_wot 6 days ago
If you are going to teach OO in Java, I fail to see why teaching design patterns is so awful.
Comment by chris_wot 6 days ago
If you are going to teach OO in Java, I fail to see why teaching design patterns is so awful.
But OO is a fundamental, even if it isn’t longer gospel.
OO is important and if I’m three years of computer science there’s no time to teach it then you have to ask what you’d heck they are doing.
OO is everywhere and it’s an important software concept and is the right solution for certain classes of problem.
I disagree? The point of a CS degree isn't to prepare you for the 20 years of stale J2EE code your first job is going to throw at you, and object-oriented design is pretty out of fashion.
What programming job are you getting in the next few years that understanding oo isn’t important?
Inheritance, polymorphism and encapsulation inform every major professional programming language and framework (except c). Even go which in many ways is active response to oo uses most of those concepts extensively. One major challenge of people programming in go is how to adapt the familiar patterns to it.
Now I’d probably not teach the whole GoF as an exercise in cataloging patterns but teaching a few of the most common while showing the concept of patterns (probably the least well understood concept in development) seems sensible.
People are still writing OO code today, they way the industry stands it looks like people will still be writing OO code for at least the next decade. Maybe the next 20 years, even.
I understand that not every developer is a big fan of OO but that doesn't mean we can ignore it.
OO is one of many paradigms to take while programming. Between functional programming, C-style subroutine programming, and OO, or the more recent amalgamations of those, you pick whatever suits your problem best. It's perfectly useful to teach, even if you dislike OO programming. I don't like writing for outdated programming designs like Scheme or LISP either, but that doesn't mean they don't have anything useful to teach.
OO is out of fashion just like blockchains and NFTs are out of fashion, and the same way AI will fall out of fashion in the future. The huge hype around it will die and what's left covers the few useful scenarios.
>> and object-oriented design is pretty out of fashion
OO isn't debunked and its not out of fashion.
All that's happened is that it's no longer gospel that "the only way to program is OO".
I write code that has all sorts of styles and approaches that fit the task at hand and sometimes the right tool for the job is OO.
I get the sense you're saying that OO has been proven to be hokum and no one should learn it or do it anymore and all that remains OO is the smoking ruin of 20 years of Java. That's not correct at all.
I mostly point it out as a reason why teaching OO as a fundamental is a bad idea in the first place.