Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?

  • 66 Replies
  • 3566 Views
*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17699
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #60 on: June 22, 2017, 10:45:33 PM »
All I know is C64 Basic V2.0 :P


FOR A = 1 TO 5
LPRINT "XXXXX"
NEXT A



XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX



 ;D


RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9984
  • V is for Viceroy
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #61 on: June 22, 2017, 11:13:10 PM »
I remember the good old days where the video games for the c64 were written in basic.  So it was possible without too much trouble to cheat by modifying the source code.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17699
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #62 on: June 22, 2017, 11:27:01 PM »
Ha ha,  green text or amber text?
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9984
  • V is for Viceroy
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #63 on: June 22, 2017, 11:44:15 PM »
Ha ha,  green text or amber text?

I seem to recall green.

But I looked down on it.  Because at home I had a serious rig.  An Atari 800 with a MOS 6502 1.8mhz process, upgraded 32k ram, 2 disk drives with a capacity of 90k.  I even had a 300bps(not megabps, not kilobps, just bps) acoustically coupled modem.  And to top it all off a dot matrix printer that never once completely printing a page without going off the rails.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17699
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #64 on: June 23, 2017, 12:14:17 AM »
Because at home I had a serious rig.

Full fledged 16 color?   :o

Like about 1987, We traded signage (our product) for a K-Pro. TWO 5" floppies and an 8" green on black screen.



Had to write my own tools. Job estimating, inventory control, assorted crap.
I don't know how much time I wasted trying to convince the secretary that a 'zero' is not the same as an 'o'.
  ::)

« Last Edit: June 23, 2017, 12:16:33 AM by Bullwinkle »
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

FlatAssembler

  • 136
  • Not a FE-er
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #65 on: July 03, 2017, 02:20:08 AM »
You appear to completely ignore what l wrote in the opening post:
Quote
So, my question is, is OOP actually a pseudoscience? It appears to be. It makes countless nonsensical rules on how to use classes and objects just to explain away why it doesn't appear to increase the productivity. That's no better than what astrology does, when its proponents say that the predictions fail because it's hard to make a horoscope. There is no scientific consensus about those rules whatsoever, the proponents of OOP can't agree even on whether C++ is an object-oriented programming language or not. It makes countless statements regarding formal logic and philosophy that programmers have no hope evaluating (much like the conspiracy theorists bombard people with claims about the photographic anomalies most of the people can't evaluate).

It's very weird to call a programming language pseudoscience. Some people think dishwashers are not practical at all, as most of the times you have to wash the dishes before and after you put them in the dishwasher. You wouldn't call dishwashers a pseudoscience...
I wasn't referring to the programming languages themselves. I was referring to the statements made by its proponents. Those statements appear to be a typical pseudoscience.

That doesn't seem like pseudoscience either. Maybe bad advertising.
So, is propagating homeopathy just bad advertising according to you?
Fan of Stephen Wolfram.
This is my parody of the conspiracy theorists:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71184.0

*

Pezevenk

  • 13727
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Is object-oriented programming pseudoscience?
« Reply #66 on: July 03, 2017, 02:38:34 AM »
You appear to completely ignore what l wrote in the opening post:
Quote
So, my question is, is OOP actually a pseudoscience? It appears to be. It makes countless nonsensical rules on how to use classes and objects just to explain away why it doesn't appear to increase the productivity. That's no better than what astrology does, when its proponents say that the predictions fail because it's hard to make a horoscope. There is no scientific consensus about those rules whatsoever, the proponents of OOP can't agree even on whether C++ is an object-oriented programming language or not. It makes countless statements regarding formal logic and philosophy that programmers have no hope evaluating (much like the conspiracy theorists bombard people with claims about the photographic anomalies most of the people can't evaluate).

It's very weird to call a programming language pseudoscience. Some people think dishwashers are not practical at all, as most of the times you have to wash the dishes before and after you put them in the dishwasher. You wouldn't call dishwashers a pseudoscience...
I wasn't referring to the programming languages themselves. I was referring to the statements made by its proponents. Those statements appear to be a typical pseudoscience.

That doesn't seem like pseudoscience either. Maybe bad advertising.
So, is propagating homeopathy just bad advertising according to you?

Only homeopathy is pretending to be a science, this is just a product that may or may not increase your productivity, depending on the individual.
It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Who wants to be a firefly and who wants to be a blue whale?
-Sceptimatic

Please do not jizz to win an argument.
-Crutonius

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from.
-Inty (again)