OOP is programming for people who don't learn actual programming...

>treating programming languages and methods like religions

Kek, diversity is the greatest strength a programmer can have.

Oh look, he's trying to be sensational by saying the greatest programming paradigm ever sucks. What a dumb dumb!

>OOP
>greatest programming paradigm ever sucks
Have your (You), stupid bait poster

There should be some measure of abstraction so people could argue which language is more expressive

Go back to bed, Yegor. Zerocracy is never gonna take off.

>types and OOP are the same thing
Not even related, brainlet

user SHITS ALL OVER on programmers who think OOP is the best paradigm. Calling them "stupid bait poster"!

Anti-OOP programmer reporting in!

Super serious question guys. Does it fuck up your brain if you learn both Functional and OOP? Should I just stick to one of them?

I think it's more a question of whether you can stomach OOP after functional.

They're not mutually exclusive, retard.

x86 assembly is programming for people who don't learn actual programming. All turing-complete languages are capable of the same things. If you find it impossible to accomplish a task in binary machine code, it's more of a testament to your lack of skill than a critique of the language. Lowering the barrier of entry to software development doesn't improve the quality of software

binary machine code is programming for people who don't learn actual programming. All turing-complete languages are capable of the same things. If you find it impossible to accomplish a task in basic logic gates, it's more of a testament to your lack of skill than a critique of the language. Lowering the barrier of entry to software development doesn't improve the quality of software

There are several already. Inform yourself.

basic logic gates is programming for people who don't learn actual programming. All turing-complete languages are capable of the same things. If you find it impossible to accomplish a task in purely abstract lambda calculus, it's more of a testament to your lack of skill than a critique of the language. Lowering the barrier of entry to software development doesn't improve the quality of software

>there are people out there that don't directly manipulate electrons when programming
Never gonna make it

C is not fucking OOP. Fucking brainlet retard fucks who never programmed anything. C is made for imperative, structured, procedural programming. Not the pajeet streetshittwr paradigm. Bjarne has fucking Alzheimers as does C++, garbage shit tier language for oop in loo brainlets.

> What is reading comprehension
OP was saying C isn't OOP you brainlet

Woooooaaaah are you sure Rajesh Oopinloo?

OP here, I didn't imply C is OOP, you're fucking stupid

Shiiieeeeeetttttttttt
*in street*

Fix my program. You can assume both functions don't invoke UB.
int a = gimme_rand_bytes(sizeof(int));
int b = gimme_rand_bytes(sizeof(int));
int c = gimme_rand_bytes(sizeof(int));
if ((a+b) < c)
do_very_important_task_A();
else
do_very_important_task_B();

...

Attached: 1532820306936.png (645x729, 105K)

I know this is bait but I'll bite:

People who think this shit in real life are insufferable faggots who have 0 concept of how much abstraction there already is between them programming in "real" languages bare metal. The amount of abstraction that's achieved by going from logic gates to C is fucking astronomical, and you could probably never achieve writing a C compiler from bare metal in your entire life if it weren't for the work of hundreds of years of mathematicians working all this shit out for you. Comparatively, the jump from C to Python is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. Sure it might abstract away a few data structures and make things nicer to use, but it's nothing compared to carefully organizing bits of sand together in such a way that they perform actual computation.

Computer science and abstraction are tied together at the hip. Losers who can't understand that the continuous abstraction of mathematics is the very essence of computing are the most obnoxious fucking faggots in the world. The losers who can't understand that it's actually harder to think abstractly are the funniest of them all. Sure you can do the equivalent of hand-holding a modern abacus. You're not accomplishing anything by reinventing the wheel for the thousandth time, you're just doing it because someone needs some retarded shit to be fast, but you're not furthering the field of computer-science. You're not developing new fucking algorithms in C, you're implementing something that someone (far smarter than you) has already thought of in a slightly different flavor just so you can get a paycheck.

>shit reading comprehension
>shits on sepples
Every time.

>using non-fixed ints in c/c++
first learn to program

OOP was originally supposed to be "OOPS" to indicate that it's a failure, but the S got abstracted away

>noughties macfag detected

>You can assume both functions don't invoke UB.

(a+b) can invoke UB due to integer overflow

Assembly who even uses code that low level. With OS X you can programme the hardware directly using Automator.

xDDD

I am Indian and I started on .NET as my career.
As you know .NET is abstraction over abstraction over abstraction over so many abstraction I just don't know the basic. I use "using" look up api and code. This way companies hides employees from knowing the concepts of computers and also they get to get their work done in less time.
But companies are corporation, do you think they would like to waste time teaching employees how to really "technically" make complex programs using C or ASM?
It's not programmers like OOP, we are forced to like it.

Well done.
not Quite