note 81694 deleted from language.oop5 by colder

Note Submitter: TwentyYearCoder Reason: useless ---- Hey Anonymous (05-Mar-2008 09:44), And Bill Gates said we'd only ever need 640K. Even the supposedly great ones can be narrow-minded or short-sighted. It's OK. Procedural has its place, too, just like OOP has its place. Don't discount one for the other. OOP is not always the correct methodology for a project. I've been coding since the early 80's and I still run into projects that require chunks of procedural code because it is quick and easy and the project just doesn't require more lines of code than that. I often come in and maintain systems that have been around a while or that were just simply written procedurally. Budgets don't always allow for rebuilding systems from scratch. In cases like those, OOP is most definitely not a good option for economic reasons. Sure, it would be ideal for the world to be all OOP all the time, but it is not. Perhaps in all four years of your programming career, you've just been sheltered from those kinds of projects. But, that's fine because there are more than enough OOP projects out there, thankfully. It isn't always black and white. OOP vs. procedural doesn't need to be sold or preached. It's a choice and a good developer or development team chooses the correct one. I am taken very seriously by my peers when I use either OOP or procedural. But, I am not laughed at or taken less seriously when I write procedural code. I am paid for it, in fact.