OOP languages were originally designed to curb the bad coding habits of people without the idea that it might make people worse and lazier and thus lower the common denominator for programming. Actual computer scientists and competent programmers understand how a computer works on a transistor level.
If building a branch predictor in a HDL isn't a trivial problem for you, then you're not a real computer scientist.
You seem to be conflating computer science with computer engineering.
OOP is good in general, it is a way to construct a program hierarchically in an efficient to understand way. OOP is for programmers, not computer scientists. That doesn't make OOP bad.
For making an algorithm you don't need OO, but for making a maintainable application with many components, you pretty much need OO.
And plenty of computer scientists never get close to hardware level, yet their algorithms blow everyone else's out of the water because of the time complexity. For example TSP the algorithm always matters more than the hardware for problems of any scale. Your branch predictor won't do fuck to improve the runtime beyond maybe one order of magnitude, which any computer scientist will scoff at. TSP has been reduced by 10 orders of magnitude, due to the algorithm.
>If building a branch predictor in a HDL isn't a trivial problem for you, then you're not a real computer scientist.
Even intel engineers can't get the fucking branch predictor right. What are you smoking?
t. brainlet
While you waste time studying about hardware and other crap, your peers learn helpful material.
Keep falling behind.
>for making a maintainable application with many components, you pretty much need OO
OH NO NO NO *breathes in* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Show me a heavy application you've written that doesn't use OO
Linux was written in C and now nobody can audit it or commit to it before spending 5 years studying it.
>Actual computer scientists and competent programmers understand how a computer works on a transistor level.
That's CE and EE. OOP is a very CS thing.
you're trying to sound super smart, but you really just sound dumb. we'll probably ignore anything else you have to "say."
Good thing I'm a programmer, not a computer scientist.
>OOP languages were originally designed to curb the bad coding habits.
I'm not sure I believe this. My main takeaway from OOP is that you have data and functionality encapsulation, without exposing global variables across a potentially huge set of source code files. Please explain to me how you accomplish this without OOP. I'm genuinely curious.
Plan 9 was written in C and anybody can get a full understanding of all components in course of months.
(that doesn't mean C is good)
>in course of months
Fuck no last time I read plan9, it was a shitshow. Fuck C and its 500-folder projects.
Absolutely SEETHING
Good. It's keeps all you dumbfuck normies and your shit stained fingers away from getting shit you shouldn't be touching, all dirty.
assuming you are already familiar with C and OS abstractions, concepts and designs ofc
K audit systemD if you're so good. yeah thats what I thought
The software you're using to shitpost is probably mostly written in OOP languages. Maybe not if you'ee using Linux or a BSD but otherwise definitely.
It works. Money talks and bullshit walks. Show us a comparison of how easy it was to develop a certain software suite in OOP on one hand and another meme paradigm onthe other. That's what the real world wants to know.
Don't get me wrong, OOP is not the solution to all things. Functional programming for example produces software much more scalable in parallelism and much more readable. But all paradigms have their merits and the solution is combining the good prts.
t. Computer engineer
>it just werks
>computer scientists and competent programmers understand how a computer works on a transistor level.
>another EE thinking he knows about computers shitpost
cute
I don't know how to build a branch predictor in HDL yet I'm a senior developer with a very nice salary @ 24 years old.
It's like telling sailors that they're not sailors because they haven't sailed through the same obscure parts of the ocean as you did.
This field is way too broad not to specialize and anyone worth their shit knows that if you programmed everything at low level you wouldn't deliver shit to the client because you'd miss deadlines. We advance as a species because we built on things our ancestors did. Don't reinvent the wheel.
Personally, I think you should always write your own libraries, make your own OS's, and hand etch your own motherboards if you want to be a REAL computer scientist.
Retard freshman level CS student who watches gamedev tutorials from indie programmers. I bet you think DoD is the best