GingerBill take on localism vs family view of program architecture

General
1

Sorry for the messy written

During the Better Software Conference talk of Casey Muratory, where he goes through the history of OOP origins, in short: Ross was the original OOP with this paper: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/366199.366256 . Then Simula and C++ implemented only some of it, and missed using Megastructs and Tagged Unions.

(link to that talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo84LFzx5nI&t=4510s&pp=ygUKb29wcyBjYXNledIHCQmtCQGHKiGM7w%3D%3D )

@gingerBill wrote, in the chat :
They’re thinking of/hoping for emergence from localism (e.g. a market), rather than thinking of family units which are structured very different. I’ve noticed this pattern for about a decade in how many different programmers think. And this kind of confirms this even more for me.

So does @gingerBill mean that aiming to have self-contained units is the first fallacy there? Is it because the real unit should be the program?

Seems like the take of Casey’s Semantic Compression Blog Post where premature boundaries and premature abstraction is one of the bigger problems of OOP design.

Or am I missing something there?

3 Likes
2

That’s pretty much my point yes. The program is “real unit” here. It doesn’t mean there are not sub-units within the unit (similar how to there individual people within a family) but rather don’t trying to make the sub-units into “units”, if that makes sense.

This pattern of misapplication does apply everywhere in the psychology of programmers. Once you notice it, you cannot not see it.

3 Likes