I don't think she cares enough to learn it.

That's why I try to help. People who don't program professionally always have opinions like that (real programmers who program in OO langs don't use OO? What the fuck?) and I try to help people get rid of dumb programming opinions.

The few books I have on C++ have maybe four pages regarding object-oriented programming seeing as how incredibly 'new' it is (OOP goes far back into the '60s with SmallTalk, and other extremely popular languages of the time, especially relative to the time they were written.

It's only a paradigm, a way of doing things. There are benefits and down-sides to programming in an object-oriented way.
There are benefits to programming structurally programming, and there are also down-sides. I'm sure there are ways to duplicate how I wrote Pong in a pure OO way, or pure structural way.

If I wanted to use an object-oriented language (Java), I would've. But I didn't, because I don't like how it looks, and the logic behind it. I think in a procedural way.
The way I see classes - which is probably incorrect - is an easy way to make a blank 'template' for me to use. As the books describe it, it's a "Cookie cutter" thing.
You make what you need (in this case, a Paddle, and all the variables or "attributes" that go with it), and you use it as many times as you need.

In regards to that one highlighted part, I'll run down the defintions of the words (Webster's Dictionary (www.Dictionary.com)):


The highlighted definition is the only thing I can think of that you meant by "real programmers," because I am a programmer - I am not however, a 'Professional' programmer.
I do it for a hobby. Just because you ride a bicycle to get from place A to place B, and it isn't "Professionally" done, doesn't make you a fake biker, or a "not real biker."
Just because you paint a house, and you aren't a "Professional painter" doesn't make it a fake, crappy, or otherwise "unreal" paint job.

I've never had any formal training, or education other than reading what professionals/teachers have written.
I've in-fact read quite a few books, read quite a lot of "tutorials" just to see how other people might learn, and I can see that some people have flaws and they get passed on through that method.
I've also used "real" programming forums. They're either extremely slow and have "real" answers, or it's a spam-fest of kids insulting each other like this (except in the case of GameDev/other forums, it's the mods. who are kids, and the posters are the real professionals who offer help, and if a mod disagrees with you, you get auto-banned with no questions asked).

This post was edited by Muted on Sep 28 2009 09:45pm

I've never seen somebody so stubborn and stuck up.

What does its age have to do with anything?

This post was edited by recursion on Sep 29 2009 12:28pm

You know, if you really don't like Object Orientation, you should at least check out functional programming. At least you wouldn't look like /that/ much of a fool.

ur a fool

Ohai! So you're a programmer when you aren't pissing people off on PaRD?

Yeah, I'm also an astronomer in my free time.

The "real" programmer bit was a bit douchey to say, but look at it from this angle. Programmers that do this professionally tend to look at highly opinionated hobbyists in a bad light. The reason behind this is that without any true programming experience (writing a few classes for a pong game doesn't count) these hobbyists tend to develop really terrible habits and very dumb opinions. Your aversion to using OO is because you don't know how to use it and no one ever taught you how to use it. If you got a C++ book that has 4 pages on OO you bought the wrong books. OO is amazingly powerful, and creates code that is clean, neat and easy to read and maintain.

The big thing is that you feel that writing quick, dirty and hacky code that is "usable" quicker is a good thing. It is never a good thing, especially down the road when that code breaks and you need to fix it. If you ever want to go beyond hobby programming (and you seem to have the talent and potential to do so) you need to break this habit of knocking a paradigm before you actually understand how it works. Feel free to PM me to talk if you want to continue and I can help you with some OO topics, I'd be glad to.

I know the moment you learned about the existance of Haskell you went ape-shit over it, and that's fine.
I watched those few videos you sent me, or maybe I just googled them; Either way. The professor explaining stuff was very intruiging.
I watched like three or so hours of that before I decided: I don't like the idea of trying to learn 30 languages simutainously when I have one that works fine.




I used to be a star-gazer for a while, before they took off "The Star Gazer" from PBS in 1998 or when-ever it was.




Yes, it was 'douchey' to say, anyway you look at it.
I in no way said Pong was a good program or written excellent by any means. It was rather trashy and old.
I may/may not PM you later, time will tell. I don't consider you or anybody else an "expert" on anything - we all know stuff, that's about it. I'm agnostic when it comes to programming.

This post was edited by Muted on Sep 29 2009 07:20pm