OOP is not that bad

CodyIT@programming.dev to Programming@programming.dev – 50 points –
osa1.net
57

You are viewing a single comment

In this post I use the word “OOP” to mean programming in statically-typed language

So Smalltalk is not object-oriented. Someone tell Alan Kay.

OOP definitely doesn't get to claim static types for only itself either. Fuck that.

They don't only say static types. They add classes, inheritance, subtyping, and virtual calls. Mind you, the difference between the last 3 is quite subtle.

So, since I've started nit-picking, Self is also OO and has prototype-based inheritance (as does javascript, but I'm not sure I'd want to defend the claim that javascript is an OO language).