this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
307 points (95.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

29671 readers
870 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] grendel84@tiny.tilde.website 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@jason

I do like being able to easily bundle properties and functions together. I think objects are useful if kept in their simplest form.

Though I think some would argue that not using inheritance and interfaces and such precludes it from really counting as OOP

[โ€“] jason@discuss.online 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

I can definitely respect a limited approach. I personally don't find any benefit from it. Anecdotally, I've become much more productive since switching from OOP style C++, to just straight C. I think a lot of that comes from the boilerplate and ceremony required to make it do the thing, but in C, you just do the thing.

I also think even using objects tends to encourage poorer design choices by thinking in terms of individual items (and their lifetimes) which is enforced by the constructor/destructor model. As opposed to thinking in terms of groups of items which leads to simpler and safer code.