Comment by zamalek
5 years ago
I've also never agreed completely with Uncle Bob. I was an OOP zealot for maybe a decade, and I'm now I'm a Rust convert. The biggest "feature" of Rust is that is probably brought semi-functional concepts to the "OOP masses." I found that, with Rust, I spent far more time solving the problem at hand...
Instead of solving how I am going to solve the problem at hand ("Clean Coding"). What a fucking waste of time, my brain power, and my lifetime keystrokes[1].
I'm starting to see that OOP is more suited to programming literal business logic. The best use for the tool is when you actually have a "Person", "Customer" and "Employee" entities that have to follow some form of business rules.
In contradiction to your "Uncle Sassy's" rules, I'm starting to understand where "Uncle Beck" was coming from:
1. Make it work.
2. Make it right.
3. Make it fast.
The amount of understanding that you can garner from make something work leads very strongly into figuring out the best way to make it right. And you shouldn't be making anything fast, unless you have a profiler and other measurements telling you to do so.
"Clean Coding" just perpetuates all the broken promises of OOP.
[1]: https://www.hanselman.com/blog/do-they-deserve-the-gift-of-y...
Simula, arguably the first (or at least one of the earliest) OOP languages, was written to simulate industrial processes, where each object was one machine (or station, or similar) in a manufacturing chain.
So, yes, it was very much designed for when you have entities interacting, each entity modeled by a class, and then having one (or more) object instantiations of that class interacting with each other.