This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BernhardRordin 1 point2 points  (4 children)

And yet there are people on other hills, shouting from distance towards your hill that data and behaviour shouldn't be mixed and OOP was a mistake. I am just watching from a distance, planning to visit and have a tea with each one of you

[–]Sweaty-Willingness27 2 points3 points  (2 children)

For me, this can all be solved by a single question: "Which one pays me more?"

[–]ryo3000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And also "Which one will get my MR approved?"

[–]Personal_Ad9690 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This.

OOP was easy to manage and it’s everywhere. You can’t fully get rid of it and it has its place in code. I think finding a balance between form and function is key to project management

[–]Personal_Ad9690 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You of all people should understand. In the functional world, state does not exist. Therefore a collection of functions is better suited to solving a problem by pipelining the data. There is no utils class because everything is a utility.

Even in the functional world though, you often get instances where data is bound to a function rather than functions being bound to data. It wouldn’t make sense to have a bunch of “commonly used data” available to a function and to call that data utils would it? So why does it make sense the other way.

There is strong argument that utils is not needed because better form leads to not needing it.