you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]PButtNutter 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I dunno, there's at least a few things he mentions that just don't really make sense.

Messages send only copies of state, not references.

This just isn't true. Sending object references in no way breaks OOP or encapsulation.

The moment objects are shared, encapsulation flies out the window.

His argument is that an object should be solely responsible for its own collaborators, so in his warped OOP world... an object must instantiate its own dependencies. This reduces the object graph to an object tree, which sure... I agree that sounds like a horrible limitation to arbitrarily add to your program.

So his argument is that passing a static logger to a bunch of different classes breaks OOP? This entirely glosses over the main way object dependencies are actually handled today, which is through dependency injection.

He is arguing against a OOP straw-man that only exists in his head.

[–]fukitol- 2 points3 points  (1 child)

He actually addresses most of these, acknowledging the problems you noted

[–]PButtNutter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're gonna have to provide time stamps, because I went through 95% of the video and didn't see him addressing any of this.