this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
383 points (94.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

32190 readers
379 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I've worked on projects with 10 000+ lines of typescript and maybe 3 classes total.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

But you have used objects I think.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Of course, but OOP is typically about putting methods on classes, inheritance of behaviour etc.

JS Objects aren't typically used that way, they tend to be used as pure data containers. At least, that's how we mostly use them.

Occasionally, we'll use objects to simplify passing multiple arguments including arrow functions, but I'd say that doesn't really count unless the arrow function mutates the object it's a part of.

[–] firelizzard@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Of course, but OOP is typically about putting methods on classes, inheritance of behaviour etc.

You’re referring to one subtype of OOP. That may be what most people mean when they say OOP, but that doesn’t make it correct. Object-oriented programming is programming with objects, which does not require inheritance or classes.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

With such a broad definition you could call even Haskell an oop language

[–] firelizzard@programming.dev 0 points 4 months ago

So you’re arguing that “Object oriented” shouldn’t apply to languages that are oriented around objects?

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

And maybe you have some functions that interact with them but don't keep them super public so they're only used by specific modules/store/redux thingy?