I learned about classes, inheritance, polymorphism, and interfaces in my CS classes. We ended up doing assignments where everything was a user-defined class, and we made subclasses and we were obsessed with constructors and destructors and getter and setter functions (bad antipatterns basically), as well as unnecessary access modifiers. Everything was based around the idea of extensibility, and how future people would be forking our code and adding additional features.
But it all seemed so unnecessary. My real programs end up having 1-2 classes tops. A lot of OOP seems unnecessarily hierarchical.
What's the point in turning everything into a class? Not everything is going to be reused endlessly. A lot of it seems like ENTERPRISE QUALITY busywork to fill 40 hours a week with what seems like work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law
work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-01 11:24
A former Enterprise Java Architect professor and Senior C++ Developer was teaching a class on C++ multiple inheritance, a known design pattern
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Bjarne Stroustrup and accept that C++ is the most highly-evolved language the world has ever known, even more than Java!”
At this moment, a brave, functional programmer, whomst had written over 150 lisp packages, who understood the necessity of garbage collection and dynamic typing,who fully supported all Common Lisp design choices made by the ANSI standardization committee stood up and held up an ancient lambda.
”What is this purpose of this, professor?”
The arrogant professor smirked quite Imperatively and smugly replied “A nail clipping from a dead and obsolete language, you moron.”
”Wrong. It’s been half a century since McCarthy discovered LISP. If it was dead and obsolete, as you say, how come this code still runs half a century later…it should be incompatible with latest standards, compilers and libraries”
The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his worn-out tome of Design Patterns and hardcover of Modern C++ Design. He stormed out of the room crying those Object Oriented tears. The same tears C++ programmers cry when confronted with “garbage collected languages” (which today reach benchmarks closer to early C++ implementations) when they desperately try to prove that C++ provides type safety or that template meta-programming is intuitive in any form. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, wished he had pulled himself up by his Boost++straps and become more than a mere OOP cultist. He wished so much that he had used these new lambdas from the latest standard to save himself from embarrassment, but he himself had argued against functional C++ on performance grounds!
The students applauded and all downloaded Scheme that day and accepted Gerald Jay Sussman as their lord and savior. An eagle named “Universal Data Structure” applied into the room, consed atop the projector and shed a few parens on the table. The "Little Schemer" was read several times, and Sussman himself showed up and lectured about the importance of homoiconic metacircular evaluators.
The professor lost his pointers and was garbage-collected the next day. He died of the lambda deficiency syndrome and was buried in the free heap.