Link Details

"I really think we might be better off if we went back to procedural programming for the bulk of the applications that we write"

If despite intense training "few know how to apply true object oriented principles" then OO has failed. Let's ditch it.

I'm not sure I agree with the suggestion of going back to procedural, but I echo feel the sentiment that OOP hasn't been all it's cracked up to be. Actually, I think the solution might be going to a slightly more functional approach. Not as far as complete immutability or anything like that, but just enough constraining to focus the people who normally write spaghetti code in Java.

Long live spaghetti code!

Especially spaghetti OO!

I think we should do more OOP, not less.

I agree that most people never make the "jump" and use OOP without understanding its main concepts fully. But it's not OOP that's at fault, it's developers thinking in procedural way that's the problem.

And I'm sure this is a debate for another time, but that sounds more like a failure of the college/university teaching the OOP concepts than the tool. Some people do inherently think in a more OO fashion like the article states, but that doesn't mean that those that don't are incapable of learning it. I can't help but see this article in the same context as Malibu Stacey: "Math is hard. Let's go shopping!" Yeah, elegant OOP isn't easy but that's no reason to throw away an extremely powerful coding tool.

No, OOP doesn't fail us.
http://www.dzone.com/links/its_common_sense_stupid_2.html