Criticisms of OOP

Abstraction

  • JBlow - Opinion on 'problems of OOP' .

    • "You are just shuffling papers in your desk, you are not solving anything".

  • Casey - Difficulties integrating something in OOP {4:23 -> 5:09} .

    • {4:23 -> 5:09}

      • "The claim that OOP makes integration easier is a lie", etc, etc.

      • (2025-03-11)

        • I 1000% agree with this phrase, integration is really very complicated when you consider that the interface in the program was made to handle only the single case described by the interface.

    • Casey says he really likes 'operator overloading'; "if the language doesn't have operator overloading, I'm not using it".

      • I have no opinion about that.

  • Casey and Primeagen - Criticisms of OOP and Clean Code .

  • Casey getting annoyed at the use of Access Modifiers, Setters and Getters .

    • (2025-03-11)

      • I 100_000% agree with how ridiculously verbose the process is, BUT I believe the example he gave is somewhat unfair.

      • He makes the variable private but implemented public setters and getters; that sounds senseless.

      • I believe private accessors have a lot of value for debugging, when it comes to limiting who can modify something.

      • I still can understand his point and maybe there is some logic behind it like "it's simply not worth the security for the absurd work of having to write this kind of thing"?.

        • Casey didn't say that phrase, but maybe there is such a philosophy behind it? I can't say if the phrase makes sense, anyway.

      • Overall, I feel this is a problem the programming language could solve, instead of having to define setters and getters; which I consider ultra imbecilic and tedious.

  • Casey - Tips to move from OOP to DOD / COP .

Performance