DEV Community

Discussion on: The scientific proof of that OOP is a mass psychosis

Collapse
 
peerreynders profile image
peerreynders • Edited

Game Oriented Assembly Lisp

2005:
"In all honesty, the biggest reason we're [Naughty Dog] not using GOAL for next-gen development is because we're now part of Sony. I can only imagine Sony's shock when they purchased Naughty Dog a few years back, hoping to be able to leverage some of our technology across other Sony studios, and then realized that there was no way anyone else would be able to use any of our codebase.
:)

Sony wants us to be able to share code with other studios, and this works both ways - both other studios using our code and vice versa. Add this to the difficulty curve of learning a new language for new hires, lack of support from external development tools (we had our own compiler, linker, and debugger, and pretty much had to use Emacs as our IDE), etc, means that there are clearly a lot of other factors involved. Note, however, that these issues aren't really technical problems, they're social ones." Ref


Beating the Averages (Paul Graham, 2001/2003):

"In January 2003, Yahoo released a new version of the editor written in C++ and Perl."


Why OO was popular? by Joe Armstrong

  • Reason 1 - It was thought to be easy to learn.
  • Reason 2 - It was thought to make code reuse easier.
  • Reason 3 - It was hyped.
  • Reason 4 - It created a new software industry.

I see no evidence of 1 and 2. Reasons 3 and 4 seem to be the driving force behind the technology. If a language technology is so bad that it creates a new industry to solve problems of its own making then it must be a good idea for the guys who want to make money.

This is is the real driving force behind OOPs.


Not much has changed and no mass psychosis is required.

Collapse
 
polterguy profile image
Thomas Hansen • Edited

Being in the middle of the road is not an accomplishment to celebrate, it's simply proof of that the statistical probability of that you're about to be hit by a car just increased exponentially ...

Collapse
 
yetanothername profile image
b

peerreynders, I think you're also missing OOP's alignment with the long history of philosophy, science, logic and mathematics as the reason why it caught on as a paradigm. It was hyped because of that alignment.