You're all stupid.
That is all. Have a nice day. :)
Printable View
You're all stupid.
That is all. Have a nice day. :)
I'm on the same page as you. OOP is for the birds. It needlessly complicates stuff to the point where without an advanced IDE, you don't know what the flidd is happening. I prefer precise, and concise code. All of the absurd objectification that J-languages injected into C to become cpp11 is a thorn in me side.
Case in point: I do not require a fdebugger to find, and fix bugs in C99, and cpp03/cpp08 code that is not overly objectified.
99.995% of the time, I can find, and fix, bugs using a plain text editor.
All of the extraneous OOP and needless abstraction drives me batty, and it's a trap, IMO. If you write clean, simple code, then you can work out flaws with no more than visual examination. Anything that reduces human legibility is breaking a fundamental premise of programming: Program code is written for humans to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.
Ocarina Of PIME?
If you can learn how to use a debugger and produce a stack trace on crashes, your quality of life will go up tremendously.Quote:
99.995% of the time, I can find, and fix, bugs using a plain text editor.
It has its pros and cons. Many places OOP is tremendously useful. I don't think anyone can credibly claim that raw pointers and arrays are easier to use, or less likely to be buggy, than STL counterparts like std::string, std::vector, or std::map. In my research code, I don't know what I would do without OOP libraries for sparse linear algebra like Eigen.
But of course it's possible to overdo it. I've had to deal with some libraries that are very much overengineered to be the point of being nearly unusable (CGAL https://www.cgal.org/ comes to mind).
Start calling the ZScript COP (Combo oriented programming) ;)