McGruff wrote:I suspect he would have more to say than you are giving him credit for.
Sorry, but thats really his position - he's been quoted a number of times on that point. Here's
another:
Rasmus also shared some hints on optimising PHP code. Essentially you should try to keep the includes to a minimum, use OOP techniques only where appropriate, and the same for layers, abstractions, etc.
McGruff wrote:
If he really were saying that procedural is as powerful as OOP he'd be wrong - simple as that.
Lets look at it the opposite way: Many people here (including the language's creator!) are saying "use what works, including oop".
You on the other hand have said:
With respect to previous posters, it's not a matter of personal preference. There is simply no comparison between OOP and procedural. You cannot approach anything like the power of OOP with other methods.
and
Everything should be an object
And so on.
You and timvw seem to be the only ones supporting that point of view - a decidedly divisive point of view!
Which is why I have great pause when you say "dont make it personal" - because instead, you are making over-generalizations about anyone that disagrees with that point of view.
You make characterizations like:
There is so much nonsense talked about the subject on the internet and I don't like to see learner programmers being misled.
And
the whole thing just sounds naive to more experienced programmers
The position that is divisive is yours. Everyone seems to be making reasonable statements (ala "Use what works", "Use oop when you can"), and you two seem to be unwilling to accept that anyone experienced (including another high-post-count moderator, and one of the authors of the language!) could possibly disagree that oop is always better than procedural code.
I have plenty of experience. I meet all three criteria you mention (depending on how you interpret your phrasing), and there is plenty to discuss.
But when you equate anyone that doesnt agree with the position that OOP is always better as being inexperienced or unintelligent ("oop is a programming intelligence indicator", indeed), you force it to BECOME a personal issue, with people defending their honor, their experience, and their point of view against your libel and accusations.
I'm certainly not trying to make it personal, but in four threads, the only post that I see that agrees in principle ("OOP is really the only choice") is feyd's.
All other posts seem to be pragmatic.
If you want people not to make it personal, then please explain how your comments avoided making it personal, and further, what entitles you to libel anyone that disagrees in a gross over-generalization.