I fundamentally disagree with the idea that these are competing strategies.
Just like walking doesn’t really compete, like at all, with Flying in an Airbus A380, Functional and OOP are at their best when you use both of them throughout your code.
Functional Programming vs. Object Oriented Programming
Submitted 9 months ago by mac@programming.dev to programming@programming.dev
https://mmhaskell.com/blog/functional-programming-vs-object-oriented-programming
Comments
abhibeckert@lemmy.world 9 months ago
bungle_in_the_jungle@lemmy.world 9 months ago
The older I get, the more “it depends”.
Gallardo994@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
This. Nothing is a silver bullet.
Corbin@programming.dev 9 months ago
Object-oriented design is about message-passing; messages are more important than objects. Classes are completely irrelevant – there’s an entire branch of object-oriented language design without classes!
abhibeckert@lemmy.world 9 months ago
there’s an entire branch of object-oriented language design without classes!
That’s not OOP anymore.
I’d argue “message passing” is an implementation detail rather than part of OOP. And it’s an implementation detail that is rarely used in modern OOP languages.
dneaves@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Also, I take issue with the claim that OOP is all about “objects”. It’s also about classes.
Depending on the language, classes are just objects too. So its still just about objects.
Pipoca@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Just like walking doesn’t really compete, like at all, with flying in an aircraft, Functional and Object Oriented Programming are at their best when you use whichever approach makes sense for a given situation and in any reasonably complex software that means your code should be full of both.
I’m not really sure sure that’s true.
In FP languages like Haskell, you get tools like algebraic data types, typeclasses, and pattern matching.
FP is really opposed to imperative programming, while objects are opposed to algebraic data types.
You can write OO code that’s 100% fully functional, and you can write code in Haskell where you barely notice you never once used an object.
UFODivebomb@programming.dev 9 months ago
I’ll just stick them together.
Signed, a Scala programmer.
Pipoca@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Yeah, OO and FP aren’t really opposed. FP is opposed to imperative programming.
That said, most FP languages give you a slightly different set of tools to use. Algebraic data types and typeclasses are really, really nice.
Honestly, working in Haskell or rust, you don’t really miss the fact that you have to jump through hoops to get traditional OO objects. There’s just not really many cases where you need them.
AdamBomb@lemmy.sdf.org 9 months ago
Yeah, me too.
Signed, an F# programmer.
UFODivebomb@programming.dev 9 months ago
Slightly jealous of the F#. Similar set of compelling features minus the JVM.
Deckweiss@lemmy.world 9 months ago
If your program functions, it’s functional.
mvirts@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Turns out I really love functional programming after all 😹
collapse_already@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
What if my program is objectionable?
bitcrafter@programming.dev 9 months ago
And if it doesn’t have objects, then it has no class!
Pipoca@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Functions, here, being the key word.
Functions are pure mappings from input to output.
solrize@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Article is pretty lame. Not exactly wrong but doesn’t convey a clear understanding.
Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 9 months ago
Agreed, I was hoping for some examples of Functional Programming, since I’m unfamiliar with it.
I got a long form ad for their Haskell book at least!
solrize@lemmy.world 9 months ago
The free online book learnyouahaskell.com is very good.
xilliah@beehaw.org 9 months ago
Functional is so sexy and I try to use it where I can but I work in a real time environment where the price of copying immutable data is just too damn high. Still it’s useful in places that aren’t time critical, especially if the problem is complex.
mvirts@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I propose a new paradigm:
Objectional programming
Functions don’t return
Everything must be done by side effects
Global state mutation is inheritance
Every call is non blocking and spawns a new thread
???
Profit
jdnewmil@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Functions don’t return… equals goto. Everything must be done by side effects… all variables are global. Global state mutation is inheritance… no grok. Every call is non-blocking and spawns a new thread… atomic bomb for junior software engineers.
??? … shorting the stock of the company that adopts this.
Profit!
abhibeckert@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Screw that I’m going to invest… how do you think Elon Musk got so rich? He did it with sloppy engineering.
Redkey@programming.dev 9 months ago
I am currently working on a game for the Atari 2600, and you just gave a good outline of my code. And I love it.