Suzdalnitski says in the article: "Some might disagree with me, but the truth is that modern Java/C# OOP has never been properly designed. It never came out of a proper research institution"
And why on Earth would they even need to come out of some institution? Languages are created for specific needs, not to stroke the ego of some Computer Scientist who has patented/perfected the One True Language. I do not care of purely theoretical aspects implemented in X language that is supposed to make everyone so much more productive... but only so long as you understand quantum entanglement / advanced lambda calculus / the origin of the Universe. Rather, does it fulfill my needs? Can I implement something elementary in it like mutating some data without working around artificial limitations of the language? Does it expose a competent API / can it integrate itself easy with, say, C libraries? These are the questions I ask myself when picking a language.
The truth is, the OOP aspects of the languages Suzdalnitski mentioned work absolutely fine for a lot of people (dare I say, the majority of people using those languages), and using them properly never hurt anyone, which is why most desktop/business software of today is written in, guess what, C++, C# and Java.
He just makes himself sound like every purist elitist nerd with a CS degree out there who discovered FP and deems it to be the all true solution to all problems in programming out there. I hate this kind of people with all soul, they only make programming worse.
Well, so don't use java and OOP for everything, they are designed for a specific needs.
Functional programming is based on maths, maths is used in every science to describe how the universe works.
So Functional Programming can be used for everything.
Java (how is an OOP language) is not worst, is limited, because it's created for a specific needs.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Suzdalnitski says in the article: "Some might disagree with me, but the truth is that modern Java/C# OOP has never been properly designed. It never came out of a proper research institution"
And why on Earth would they even need to come out of some institution? Languages are created for specific needs, not to stroke the ego of some Computer Scientist who has patented/perfected the One True Language. I do not care of purely theoretical aspects implemented in X language that is supposed to make everyone so much more productive... but only so long as you understand quantum entanglement / advanced lambda calculus / the origin of the Universe. Rather, does it fulfill my needs? Can I implement something elementary in it like mutating some data without working around artificial limitations of the language? Does it expose a competent API / can it integrate itself easy with, say, C libraries? These are the questions I ask myself when picking a language.
The truth is, the OOP aspects of the languages Suzdalnitski mentioned work absolutely fine for a lot of people (dare I say, the majority of people using those languages), and using them properly never hurt anyone, which is why most desktop/business software of today is written in, guess what, C++, C# and Java.
He just makes himself sound like every purist elitist nerd with a CS degree out there who discovered FP and deems it to be the all true solution to all problems in programming out there. I hate this kind of people with all soul, they only make programming worse.
Well, so don't use java and OOP for everything, they are designed for a specific needs.
Functional programming is based on maths, maths is used in every science to describe how the universe works.
So Functional Programming can be used for everything.
Java (how is an OOP language) is not worst, is limited, because it's created for a specific needs.