Its long and frustrated, but most of the points he makes are true. A lot of the stuff people claim as
I think the original vision of OOP is more valuable than what we call OOP right now. I think a good balance would be writing low-level stuff in functional style and then wrapping it in objects when you need state and cross-library messaging. Also, it seems there is some overlap between the original vision for OOP and what we call "microservices" today.
Here are some interesting resources on the subject:
Alan Kay's elaboration on what he envisioned when he coined the term:
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_jf47ht81Ht/doc_kay...
Two papers he references:
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_memorand...
http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2281&c...
Cool article on failures of OOP:
http://www.smashcompany.com/technology/object-oriented-progr...
Its long and frustrated, but most of the points he makes are true. A lot of the stuff people claim as
I think the original vision of OOP is more valuable than what we call OOP right now. I think a good balance would be writing low-level stuff in functional style and then wrapping it in objects when you need state and cross-library messaging. Also, it seems there is some overlap between the original vision for OOP and what we call "microservices" today.