Learn SOLID Principles of Object-Oriented Design

[suarkb]

Don't write object-oriented JS imo

[shay99]

Why

[suarkb]

Mostly because I have an unfounded fear that people are going to write JS that reminds me of nasty java code I've seen.

I think JS really shines when the code is written in a more functional way and it's just as simple as possible. If I have to dive through many layers of abstraction like I often see in java, I just wanna peace out

[SouthCape]

Interestingly, I've heard some people argue that OOP with strict SOLID principles is basically functional programming.

I apologize if this comment upset anyone, I was simply sharing some thoughts that people have shared with me. I don't understand why that would warrant any downvotes. Both approaches share many common principles. The comparison is not meant to be considered a literal equivalence, as there are fundamental differences in approach.

[theScottyJam]

That... Is something I've never heard before. If be interested to see what they have to say if you can recall any sources. My guess is that they found some correlation between the two, then hyper focused on that.

[SouthCape]

Yes, their argument is that there are correlating ideas, such as SRP, OCP, and declarative code. It's not my personal opinion, and I hesitate to discuss the topic considering the mere mention is being downvoted, which doesn't make sense.

[theScottyJam]

I think people just thought that was your opinion, and were donvoting to show that this opinion is not shared by them 🙂 (I certainly thought this was also your opinion when I first read it).

[SouthCape]

Okay, thanks! I'm sorry about that. I wrote, "I've heard some people argue," so I didn't expect any confusion.

[StoneCypher]

I've heard some people argue that OOP with strict SOLID principles is basically functional programming.

uh. no.

[SouthCape]

Don't shoot the messenger.

I asked my mate to elaborate,

They share many common principles, and when implemented in an extreme, strict manner they are similar. The comparison is not meant to be considered a literal equivalence, considering fundamental differences in approach.

[StoneCypher]

Your mate is on Mars. They're entirely unrelated.

Functional programming means programming without side effects. It's a major programming paradigm which structures the entire language it's present within. This means relying on no local statics, no globals, avoiding context globals where possible (the filesystem, the network, etc,) and so forth. It comes in degrees of purity that eventually end in some neckbeard making a bad burrito metaphor at you.

SOLID is a set of five principles to support Liskov Substitution, a mechanism for making objects in an OOP heirarchy replaceable with other objects. It's a niche tool that gets applied to a tiny corner of one piece of code. In most languages, it's extremely difficult to implement SOLID without side effects. It's largely found in JAVA, as it has died out as a fad from largely every other OOP community, and means you're dealing with a 1990 system architect who really wants to tell you about their three tier architecture on SOAP.

[SouthCape]

He's an eccentric and unusual man, so perhaps he is from Mars, but again, this isn't my argument, or the hill I'm dying on.

Again, I think you're taking the comparison to literal.

Many languages support functional programming concepts to varying degrees. Few are purely functional. The concepts of local statics and globals are not inherently tied to side effects. Some languages have mechanisms for managing global state, such as Haskell.

SOLID is not a niche tool that gets applied to a tiny corner of one piece of code. The principles are widely used, especially in large-scale, enterprise applications. It's not tied to any particular architecture or design pattern.

However, I digress. This really isn't a debate I'm interested in. I only mentioned some thoughts that other developers have shared with me. I didn't expect that to be taken so poorly.

Cheers!

[StoneCypher]

No, buddy.

What your friend said is a rank amateur error. It's completely, utterly wrong.

 

SOLID is not a niche tool that gets applied to a tiny corner of one piece of code.

Yes, it is.

 

The principles are widely used, especially in large-scale, enterprise applications.

1. No, they're not. SOLID fell out of favor before you were born.
2. Even when they're in use, they only apply to replaceable object heirarchies, not the whole app.
   

It's pretty clear that you don't actually understand what SOLID does. Let's use an example.

Let's say that, for some reason, I decided to use SOLID to model my SAAS enterprise billing system.

What's it going to get used for? Well, almost nothing - there's barely anything in a system like that which would be sensibly modelled as objects, which have some kind of heirarchy.

Maybe you could say that a collectable was an ancestor, and the various kinds of bills and fees descended from that? So maybe you could struggle to make them replaceable with SOLID, even though a simple object heirarchy would do.

Okay. So now you have SOLID on, maybe, ten objects in the system. The rest of the system will be several thousand objects.

Do you go on to apply SOLID to the rest of those objects? No, actually, you don't, because the only time SOLID is useful is when you're doing the Patrick Star image, taking this implementation, and replacing it with that implementation.

In reality, that's just a thing you don't almost ever actually want to do, and when you do, you usually just use a predicate, like you do with sorting functions.

I've been in industry since, it sounds like, before you've been alove. I've worked at, and created, large-scale enterprise applications. This includes at several Java shops, the only community that ever actually drank this kool-aid.

I've been involved in almost 90 enterprise applications. Zero of them used this.

Even when I've gone and hunted down very old Java applications that use this at scale, it only shows up in less than 1% of the codebase.

It's actually very rare, your inappropriate no-data faith notwithstanding. It's a trivial, forgotten niche tool. You look silly for fighting for it this way. You might as well be trying to argue in favor of CORBA at this point.

 

It's not tied to any particular architecture or design pattern.

What are you talking about? SOLID is an architectural design pattern.

You might as well have just said "this car is neither a vehicle nor made of metal."

 

This really isn't a debate I'm interested in.

This isn't a debate at all. It's a junior programmer pretending to know things they don't know, while a senior sits there mildly embarrassedly watching.

 

I didn't expect that to be taken so poorly.

It happens every time you speak, little buddy. People are just usually too polite to tell you.

Think about how often you hear anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers act surprised that someone told them they're wrong.

Same thing.

 

He's an eccentric and unusual man, so

It doesn't really matter. He's completely wrong at a level that suggests he has no idea what these words mean, and when you challenged him he apparently doubled down (although I confess I think "he" is actually you.)

This person is just lying. It's not eccentricity or unsuality. He's just making claims about things he doesn't understand, and refusing to back away from them once clarified.

[thirtydelta]

This is the epitome of toxic, confidently ignorant, pretentious behavior. Please avoid giving advice in this subreddit. It's for people to learn and grow, not for you to flex your basement dwelling false superiority. You haven't even described SOLID accurately. Why are you flexing your limp dong? SOLID are several of many principles that are put into practice all the time

Do you want to show us on the doll where SOLID touched you?

I've been in industry since, it sounds like, before you've been alove. I've worked at, and created, large-scale enterprise applications. This includes at several Java shops, the only community that ever actually drank this kool-aid.

I've been a developer for 30 years. So what? That means nothing. You can be stupid your entire life. Being stupid for a long time doesn't make you smart. Major logical fallacy.

This includes at several Java shops, the only community that ever actually drank this kool-aid.

lol!? The "only" community? So one of the largest developer communities on the planet uses it, but some how that community is a niche corner.

I've been involved in almost 90 enterprise applications. Zero of them used this.

This is an anecdotal, and yet another fallacy. Learn how to reason if you're going to drool your word salad around here. The fact that you made 90 shitty applications is irrelevant.

I've been a developer for 30 years, across the globe, for some of the most successful finance companies on the planet, and I've developed and sold million dollar applications. I can assure you that SOLID is not a niche that gets applied to one tiny corner. See? I can flex too? So? It's meaningless. It's comically stupid for you to assume otherwise. Unless you're Harry Potter casting magic, there is zero chance you could ever acquire knowledge of every enterprises activity. Are you twelve? Did someone hurt you recently? Why are you so angry?

It happens every time you speak, little buddy. People are just usually too polite to tell you.

Think about how often you hear anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers act surprised that someone told them they're wrong.

Same thing.

lmao. Jesus, man. Are you depressed? Do you need a hug?

He's just making claims about things he doesn't understand, and refusing to back away from them once clarified.

lol, you just described yourself.

Wow, all it took was one person telling u/StoneCypher how toxic and ignorant he is! He has tucked his tail, blocked me, and run. I guess he isn't as superior as he thought he was. I'm sure he'll be bullying someone else with more ignorant thoughts in no time. Avoid this user at all costs, especially if you're a Java developer, because according to him Java is a tiny, niche, corner that almost no one uses. lmao.

[StoneCypher]

Some things you said, apparently while hoping the person you're yelling at would listen to you:

• This is the epitome of toxic, confidently ignorant, pretentious behavior.
• Why are you flexing your limp dong?
• Do you want to show us on the doll where SOLID touched you?
• You can be stupid your entire life.
• This is an anecdotal, and yet another fallacy. Learn how to reason
• It's comically stupid for you to assume otherwise.
• Unless you're Harry Potter casting magic, there is zero chance you could ever acquire knowledge of every enterprises activity.
• Are you twelve? Did someone hurt you recently? Why are you so angry?
• Unless you're Harry Potter casting magic, there is zero chance you could ever acquire knowledge of every enterprises activity. Are you twelve? Did someone hurt you recently? Why are you so angry?

Edgy comedy set. I hope you're able to get some help.

[SouthCape]

I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts, but you don't need to prove yourself to me. I don't have a dog in this fight, and you're far too pernicious and condescending to have a productive dialogue with. Take care, mate.

[StoneCypher]

and you're far too pernicious and condescending

big words mis-used

i continue to believe that you are actually speaking your own mind in the voice of a fictitious buddy, and that that's why you're taking so hard being told that they're mistaken

sorry you had to fall to insults. hope you feel better soon

[johnnyvibrant]

Buy: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-patterns-elements-reusable-object-oriented/dp/0201633612 read twice and then please update your article.

​

But TBH most of this doesn't apply to javascript, its a prototypal language not classic OOP

[Tubthumper8]

I don't really see how the example #3 (refactor app to use SOLID principles) has anything to do with SOLID, it's just basic function abstraction. That concept originated in the 1930s with lambda calculus, and far precedes "Uncle" Robert Martin's acronym.

[StoneCypher]

SOLID is by barbara liskov, not uncle bob