Timeline for How far can you push Object Oriented Programming?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2024 at 14:19 | comment | added | candied_orange | @pjc50 So Holger can talk past me and double down but I can't? Aw man. Fine. I'll stick to a strictly necessary hostile approach. | |
| May 13, 2024 at 13:37 | comment | added | pjc50 | @candied_orange this feels like an unnecessarily hostile approach | |
| May 13, 2024 at 11:58 | comment | added | candied_orange | @Holger So you say the check's in the mail? | |
| May 13, 2024 at 11:46 | comment | added | Holger | @candied_orange you didn’t provide a definition of OOP, you just provided a single word, “Encapsulation”, which is again a term without a canonical definition, everyone would agree on. | |
| May 13, 2024 at 11:33 | comment | added | candied_orange | @Holger there is not a single definition of anything that all people agree on. That's why I provided one. Encapsulation, being a key feature of OOP and how it requires the ability to move methods. And how there are boundaries that prevent that. I depicted a way of thinking about OOP and am asking if there is a better way or if this makes some sense. If we just want to redefine everything I could say the words you just used mean you admit you owe me $5. Where is my money? | |
| May 13, 2024 at 11:11 | comment | added | Holger | @candied_orange the conclusion “you can't have OOP everywhere” is based on the assumption that there was a set of rules to be strictly followed, to qualify as “object oriented”. That’s just wrong. There is not a single definition of OOP, all people agree on. | |
| May 13, 2024 at 4:07 | comment | added | Flater | @candied_orange: Hypothetically, if you posit that OOP cannot be deterministically attributed down to each individual line of code in isolation, then your question would effectively be unanswerable. Consider the possibility that there might not be a conclusive yes/no to your answer, simply because it's not that deterministically and granularly defined. | |
| May 13, 2024 at 1:05 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 55 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 13:06 | comment | added | Ced | @candied_orange Agreed, I had the same feeling when posting. I'd say yes you can't, ultimately, but a follow up interesting question might be, in under what circumstance can you, and most importantly when should you ? | |
| May 12, 2024 at 3:04 | comment | added | candied_orange | I feel like I understand what you're saying, but I also feel like you have neither agreed nor disagreed with my central thesis: you can't have OOP everywhere. I think you've hinted agreement but I fear that's just my wishful thinking. | |
| May 12, 2024 at 1:35 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 1:30 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 1:25 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 1:14 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:54 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 42 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:48 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | deleted 6 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:39 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 25 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:31 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 25 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:22 | history | edited | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 25 characters in body |
| May 12, 2024 at 0:17 | history | answered | Ced | CC BY-SA 4.0 |