Comments by "" (@jboss1073) on "Functional Programming IS NO BETTER than Object Oriented Programming" video.

  1. Sir, it's not about "you can do that in OOP too", it's about "is there a benefit to doing things this way here". There's no benefit to avoiding state in OOP languages. There is a benefit in doing so in FP languages: compile-time guarantees. Please address this.
    2
  2. If "OO and FP are both valuable tools in building complex systems" why do so many languages FORCE OOP onto the programmer? Are good things forced? Are good ideas forced on people? Is that how good ideas work in your life? You're forced to do them? Is that how they work? Is it really? Have you really thought about this?
    2
  3. FP has to be better than OOP because there is an actual academic theory behind FP, which there isn't one behind OOP (you all don't like to admit Objects are Co-Monads so you never develop a proper theory of it).
    1
  4. So what does it take NOT to be "a tool in the toolbox"? Because OOP has NO agreed-upon definition and NO theory behind it. If that doesn't suffice to make it a non-tool, what would make it a non-tool?
    1