C++ is not OOP you newfag. What can be done about the C++ menace?

Calling it 'Erlang-style "object-oriented" programming' is wrong, Erlang uses FP with actor model not OO. It lacks basic OO concepts like inheritance.

is reply to

I've heard of this "Object Oriented Programming" before. Is this when you compile C files seperately and link the resultant object files together - rather than having all the C files include each other?

C is C(!!!)ommunist. It embodies the 'worse is better' philosophy, which is representative of Communism.
See: There are no iphones with communism. featureful, luxurious consumer goods wont be made, just as C is simple and bare, without many features or abstractions.
While the americans invented a pressurized pen that would work in space, communist russians just used a pencil. vastly simpler to manufacture and requires no new research, but means you have to deal with pencil shavings and broken tips in zero g. but this is preferrable, according to this philosphy, to wasting the time and energy on a more complicated solution.
to this day theres a stereotype of russian technology as being "ugly"(though beautiful once you learn to appreciate it for what it is), yet reliable and utilitarian, due to its simplicity. This did not come from post-soviet russia.

you can do OOP in straight C with structs and pointers

OOP is a misunderstood meme. As i see it, its about how you are organizing your language. OOP can happen in any language, all you got to do is think of stuff as objects/components etc.. there you go.

OOP languages themselves are an autistic version of that

reported for low effort bait thread. Fuck you, OP.

C++ is OOP, it's just not "pure OOP" (in which literally everything is an object). Even Java isn't pure OOP, due to the existence of primitives, and I believe that methods and modules aren't usable as objects (but I've never used Java outside of college, so I can't be sure).
A language isn't pure OOP unless functions are first-class, like with Python.
That said, "pure OOP" is overrated. OOP can be useful, but is not appropriate for every program and library. C++ is nice because it doesn't force the paradigm on you.

sage for yet another language shitfling

If you want a Soviet theme, C is the Gulag.

And this is why OOP is fucking stupid. One autismo thinks it's better to put functions in different fucking files, WELL MAYBE I DON'T WANT TO MAKE ANOTHER FUCKING GOD DAMN FILE TO HOLD A FOUR LINE FUNCTION/

if that shit people write in C++, Java, or C# is OOP, then yes, this is correct

well at least it's not yet another >literallywho got censored from the internet after being stupid enough to pay someone for a 20 byte text record in a database that they have to renew every year and attach their home phone number to

...

I think C++ is multiprogramming, not object oriented.

I don't understand this.
Lisp is an elegant and free language, where elegance and freedom are a white man's qualities.
Languages like Java and C# are Jewish.

OP, why aren't you using OCAML?
Object-orientation provides you with concepts that will be meaningful for only a few things in the program. If you enter the mentality that OOP is everything you will soon be reduced to a moron who ends up trying to express every relation in the system in terms of inheritance and end up producing a bigger mess than you ever could without OOP.

Composition > Inheritance. Where do people get this idea that OOP is inheritance?

Kys stormfag

For the love of god define what you mean by OOP before you say anything about it.

Lisp was invented by a (half) Jew (McCarthy) and many of its dialects had Jews as major contributors (Scheme, Emacs Lisp and probably more). Plus all the (((parentheses))) in the language.

The biggest issue with Lisp is the sheer autism of the people behind it. You cannot write portable Lisp programs which are more than just academic toys. If you want to use Lisp for real work your best bet is to pick one implementation and hope it stays around for the foreseeable future.

Just write your own lisp.

buildyourownlisp.com

see

Sepples is OOP, and I think the word you're looking for is multi-paradigm tbh.

I'm convinced that Lisp was the first attempt by Jews in academia to get the white man to spin his wheels. It was pushed super hard in the late '80s and '90s in CS yet it never left academia in any meaningful way as it was fucking garbage. It was the 'social justice' of tech - an intentionally unworkable idea maliciously forced into everyone's head.

This is your brain on nu-Holla Forums

Because the problem to too many mutually incompatible Lisps is even more mutually incompatible Lisps.

Lisp would have been a great language if it wasn't for the incompatibility autism. Generations of inbreeding and tribalism has left the Ashkenazi a cesspool of mental illnesses, so I wouldn't be surprised if the state of Lisp really is the result of genuine autism.

I think Racket is the closest to a Lisp that can actually be used for real-world work. Chibi-Scheme also looks like a nice language for embedding into another program, kind of like Lua.

Because the solution to too many...

C was made by an androgynous circumcised man who went to work for Google.

Dennis Ritchie =/= Ken Thompson.

No, lisp and every descendant of it is a dead-end. Purge it from your mind before it wastes your efforts.

All of these languages are jewish trash. White man's language is Delphi.