Відео

XD what a stupid title... Btw multiplying is wrong it is not safe cause u can make error by using it, u should only make addition of 1 until u reach the result, it's way way safer... Yeah multiplying and OOP are bad cause i'm too stupid to use them correctly and i make a lot of error when i try, so they are very bad as they are not brainlesspeopleproof 🤪 PS you should stay immobile, cause when you walk the probabilty of falling ain't zero, so just lay on the ground it's safer... And ask Brian Will for GTA 7 he is currently programming it in a procedural way with a bunch of his friends who just like him think procedural programming is the future (when we all know it's the past) so just wait one or two centuries and Brian will prove his point by releasing GTA7, his procedural chef d'oeuvre 🤣😂 idiots dare to do anything, that’s even how we recognize them ; that video got such a daring title ^^

For all programming techniques, 1: learn the implementation and techniques. 2: use them to effectively create a tools to address a problem. Example: ytDbTk class ytDb.Query ytDb.AcrionA.....ActionZ You now can have mySql, MongoDb, ....every databse child classes of ytDbTk that only need to override Query method and you dont have to worry about Actions A .Z Additional you can now have areays of subclasses as one and not make your own bookkeeping etc. OOP is just a tool, and if it's misused by the programer then not a fault of OO. You cannot make alternative solution of above scenario and easier to upkeep, understand and work with

18:15 OMG you just explained why Angular sucks so bad!!!!! lol

How are C++ lambdas different from your ideal anonymous function example?

13:38 This play game function code xdddd wtf

oop still using in all industry until now

Much Ado About Nothing. He does not understand what OOP is for.

The real title of the video should be "how someone who doesn't even understand a technology chooses to criticize it instead of humbly admitting he doesn't understand it, and learning from it". Seriously, delete this video if you don't want to ruin your career - your credibility has gone into the red zone.

Fantastic explanation.

There is no OOP that comes close to C++. OOP is the best programming idea that ever came along. BTW, it's subjective to show examples to prove your point. Examples fall on the programmer not the language. OOP is a methodology that C++ implements very well once a programmer fully understands how to properly use it. Most of the time the programmer is the problem, not the language.

8 years later and most folks are moving away from OOP languages, dude was right

I'm taking exception to the complaint on "abstract" the programming use is the noun, the use the video has is the adjective. ;p

On min 33:15: what does it mean there's a buffer for each block? All storage is "repeated" on disk and the buffer?

This is really mean actually

maybe markdown for terminal output

The main reasons for using OOP are inheritance and better organziation. It does make sense to have a FtpDownloader class because you will always know that your FTP operations are found within this class. If you need several instances and maybe some with TLS/SSL encryption you don't need to overwrite your code but instead you can inherit from this class. This will guarantee legacy compatibility with zero risk of breaking. This is very important in large scale high demanding systems. But of course OOP is not suited for every use case.

Use declaration is very “Rust”

Let's deconstruct the video's arguments point by point: Encapsulation: Claiming that encapsulation fails at granular levels demonstrates an incomplete understanding of the concept. Encapsulation is not about completely isolating every variable, but about organizing code into cohesive units with well-defined interfaces. This organization, even at micro-levels, improves code maintainability, reusability, and testability. Modern OOP, with interfaces and dependency injection, minimizes coupling and makes state management easier. Classes: Indeed, classes can be misused and lead to excessive abstraction. However, the fault lies not with OOP itself, but with the lack of experience or discipline of programmers. Good design practices, such as SOLID, and object-oriented modeling tools, like UML, guide the development of cohesive and reusable classes. Ignoring the abstraction power offered by classes is denying oneself a powerful tool for modeling complex systems in a more natural and intuitive way. Abstraction: Abstraction is not the enemy; it is an essential ally for managing the increasing complexity of modern software. Well-defined abstractions allow programmers to focus on high-level concepts without getting lost in implementation details. OOP, with its concepts of inheritance, polymorphism, and interfaces, provides robust mechanisms for building efficient and reusable abstractions. One must recognize that good abstractions take time and experience to develop. Performance: Reducing the issue of performance to a mere "garbage collection" problem ignores the advances in compilers and runtimes of languages like Java, which optimize code efficiently. Furthermore, OOP does not preclude using performance optimization techniques like "Data-Oriented Design." It's important to remember that code readability and maintainability, facilitated by OOP, contribute to long-term performance optimization. Code Aesthetics: Code aesthetics are not a mere whim but a crucial factor for code readability and maintainability. By structuring code into cohesive units with well-defined interfaces, OOP contributes to more organized and easy-to-understand code. Ignoring code aesthetics is sacrificing code readability and, therefore, ease of maintenance and evolution.

Amazing series but I personally disagree about big vs little endian :) Big endian makes more sense for HUMANS to read them as numbers going left to right. The advantage of little endian however is that the least significant digit of ANY size number is always in the same place. So code operating on numbers can start at the same index and grow in the same direction regardless of storage class. This yields a lot of benefits especially in instruction decoding like branches that jump near or far. Personally don't like x86 as an ISA or anything else really but i do feel like they (and 6502) got this right.

True Functional Programming has never been tried! Oh wait, this video argues for "do the thing" comments for every line that does the thing, in one giant function with anonymous subfunctions or rather weird use blocks. KISS and stick to functions plskthnx.

The convenience mentioned at 14:10 is in Lean 4 through Koka

fyi chimera is pronounced Kai-mira. idky but it is.

Real programmers put all their code in a single file

22:59 this is not even close to a "better" solution, i would love to see how you add to that spaghetti code a new DateTime parser, and then a new Base64 decoder parser, and then a new URL parser, and then a new valid file system path parser, and so on. The problem with your video, is that you take the examples only as they are presented, only for that small domain requirement, you do not see the bigger picture at all. Your "better" solution is not open for extension at all, any new parser requires adding a bunch of new IF statements into that - already complex- spaghetti code.

I come back to this about yearly, and every year I’m more and more pushed to the opinion that this man is both confidently wrong on most of his ideas in general but he’s well spoken so people eat it up.

Where did you get the idea from that messages only send copies of state? In a pure OO language, every passed parameter would be a reference.

43:20, Julia has the equivalent of use blocks, also has no objects. The only problem I see with this languaje is that is very domain specific, but the got many things right.

The bottom-up address space seems to make sense for the little-endian storage of data...especially to an Irish viewer (as Ogham script is literally just etched upward along a sharp edge on a rock or a post). Except...execution of code progresses up the addresses too, and Logisim, for one thing, shows data addresses increasing DOWN the ROM and RAM.

I didn't know I wasn't the only one who feels this way.

for ray tracing i need vulkan library?

"you don't need a class, hash_map will work just fine" (conveniently forgetting that hash_map is a class itself) ;)

12:30 Damn I remember having to restart flash games back in the day because they would crash after a while because of memory leaks, nice to somewhat understand why now

The best Explanation...❤️❤️

I'm just fiddling with programming languages, but yes if you argue that OOP fails at encapsulating states it is true. Functional programming languages like Haskell solved that problem brilliantly. Haskell never was widely used but nowadays most programming languages borrows some of it's concepts like python. The real problem is mutable states in the first place, and we can't get rid of these problems because if weird stuff to going to happen it will. OOP just delays the problem. But you know what really bothers me about OOP ? "You wanted a banana but what you got was a gorilla holding the banana and the entire jungle" - Joe Armstrong

i use opegl in dev c++ gl library i guess it pre 2.0 so it dont use GLSL ...can i use phong light with 2.0 pre.version?

Haven't seen the video but based

THANKK YOUUU SO MUUUCH

OOP dominates not because it's better, but because it's easier to conceptualise and build, more intuitive for the human brain.

You sir... are a hero. Thank you for this series... been so educational! <3

i need a transcript of the whole video 😂

>"Amidst the allure of simplicity, don't mistake complexity for incompetence. While it's easy to dismiss intricate systems as flawed, true brilliance lies in discerning when complexity serves a purpose. Beware of praising simplicity blindly, for in the realm of intellect, it's the mastery of intricacies that truly distinguishes the brilliant from the mundane."

So how did this video age

I've fallen in love with data-oriented programming..

POSIXISM NUMBER ONE LANGUAGE! POSIXISM NUMBER ONE LANGUAGE! POSIXISM NUMBER ONE LANGUAGE!

Discovered this masterpiece in 2024, man, I feel that pain, all that time I was facing with OOP bloatware and nonsense, when you eventually solved one OOP issue and introduced few new one, just asking all the time "why, why so complicated.."

I completely agree with this video! I learned structured programming and the issues with objects is figuring out the best design for the objects and inheritance, at the start. OOP code, almost always compiles into bigger code that runs slower.

This was made 8 years ago. He said 10 years from then it would be the default. It's definitely gone in that direction. I remember back in college thinking OOP was great and it made sense. Then I started working on large scale projects in the real world and realizing it creates more problems than it solves, yet my peers just kept chugging along singing its praises. OOP almost seemed like a cult looking back 😂.

Encapsulation is the worst...

Completely amateur programmer here, trying to make a game with no education or experience coding. Most tutorials I find teach OOP, but for some reason I just can't adapt to it, its as this video says, anything with any complexity that needs multiple linked behaviors becomes an entangled mess, leading to paralysis. So now I'm just coding without almost any inheritance, it just seems more logical, any instance of something I create, I just store it everywhere it will be used, so when I need to use it I just know exactly where it is, plus every class when instanced I also put a reference to it inside a global dictionary, so no matter what, I always have a way to acess it easily. Not sure if I'm doing this correctly, or if this is considered procedural, but its flowing much better. Loved the video, its good to know that there are other options other than OOP.

Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) is a powerful and widely-used programming paradigm, but it's essential to understand its concepts and best practices to avoid potential issues. Let's discuss these problems and provide solutions to make your OOP code more efficient and maintainable. 1. Problem: Lack of Encapsulation Solution: Properly encapsulate data and behavior within classes. Encapsulation helps protect the internal state of an object and provides a clear boundary between different parts of the program. By doing so, you can control how the data is accessed and modified, ensuring data integrity and reducing the chances of introducing bugs. 2. Problem: Poor Inheritance Usage Solution: Use inheritance when it makes sense and avoid overusing it. Inheritance is a powerful tool for code reuse, but it can lead to issues if not used appropriately. Overusing inheritance can result in complex class hierarchies, making the code harder to understand and maintain. Instead, consider using composition (aggregation) or interfaces to achieve code reuse and maintain flexibility. 3. Problem: Overly Complex Design Solution: Strive for simplicity and adhere to the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP). The SRP states that a class should have only one reason to change. By keeping classes focused on a single responsibility, you can create more modular and maintainable code. This also makes it easier to understand the purpose of each class and reduces the chances of introducing unintended side effects. 4. Problem: Inadequate Testing Solution: Write comprehensive unit tests to ensure your OOP code functions as expected. Testing is crucial in identifying and fixing issues early in the development process. By writing unit tests for your classes and methods, you can verify their behavior and ensure that they meet the desired specifications. This helps maintain code quality and reduces the risk of introducing regressions when making future changes. In summary, Object-Oriented Programming can be powerful and beneficial when used correctly. By focusing on encapsulation, proper inheritance usage, simple design, and thorough testing, you can create more robust and maintainable code.