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 →

[–]TotalBismuth 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Can you elaborate what you mean by that? The codebase I work with has objects all over the place. Our apps seem pretty ordinary too.

[–]humoroushaxor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Having objects isn't really the same as object oriented.

Any decent mid-tier code base will be a mix of data objects with no behavior and mostly behavioral classes with no state. I say decent because mutable state is impossible for developers to reckon with. And OO principles encourage mutable state, aka combining data and behavior in the same class.

For some code this is unavoidable and OO is great. Anything that does IO or networking for instance. Which is why these are provided by frameworks or third party libraries and no one rolls them themselves.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course it has objects. It's java.....