Skip to main content

FOOP

I have been caught at odds when asked about some of the key differences between Object Oriented Programming and Functional Programming. In fact I’ve felt somewhat like a fraud, in that I regularly work in both paradigms. I often keep in mind the many of the precepts of functional design in the methods of objects I am creating.
So, I was looking to see what others had to say on FOOP (Functional Object Oriented Programming - or perhaps POOF “Programming Object Oriented Functionally”?) and I came across a post on Lambda the Ultimate which let me know I am not alone.
This lead me on to further investigations on the questions I was pondering such as where the different types of programming work - and when they don’t. A good synopsis of this started on Stack Exchange of course... These readings exposed me to a key nub of the problem - concisely stated, which has the name of “The Expression Problem”.

The expression problem is well stated in the best answer in the stack exchange post:
  • Object-oriented languages are good when you have a fixed set of operations on things, and as your code evolves, you primarily add new things. This can be accomplished by adding new classes which implement existing methods, and the existing classes are left alone.
  • Functional languages are good when you have a fixed set of things, and as your code evolves, you primarily add new operations on existing things. This can be accomplished by adding new functions which compute with existing data types, and the existing functions are left alone.
A look at the expression problem in detail with some ideas towards solutions is nicel addressed in Eli Bendersky’s blog post . His post seems to fit well with the some of the original literature on the problem
This bit of diversionary reading has me puzzling over some recent designs in C#, and I am also thinking of solution to the expression problem in JavaScript (where I am not even convinced I can call it a problem).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let's Not Mess Around with Security on our Personal Systems Either!

Essential Security Practices for Your Personal Systems Ensuring a minimal level of cybersecurity, privacy, and availability on your personal systems means you need to manage the following essential practices. This is a brief overview of recommendations from sources like CISA, NSA, etc., focused on personal laptop, phone, and other systems' security. Anti-virus  I've found you'll get the best anti-virus protection and usability from a paid product - I've always had good luck with Norton labeled products. If you are looking for current vendor offerings see:  https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-antivirus-protection Regardless of whether you choose to use a commercial product or open-source anti-virus tool, it is absolutely something you need to use. This is the minimally needed level of system security. Once installed, ideally, it should be invisible until there's a security problem it can't prevent or solve.   Backups You need to have at least a minimal level of ...
Post a Comment
Read more

You don't really know who you're talking to online...

The following is a story that I think highlights the assumptions that get you into trouble online... https://www.proofpoint.com/us/blog/threat-insight/i-knew-you-were-trouble-ta456-targets-defense-contractor-alluring-social-media This is particularly scary since we found so much utility in online connections during the pandemic and out of necessity, started trusting more online. Please note the timeline for this breach - it was a long, slow process, a key factor in many 'cons'. "Build trust" is a key first step, once someone has identified you as a party. You think...you're convinced you know who your talking to, but if you don't triangulate the identity with some non-online, ideally in-person information, you shouldn't trust. And even if you do get what seems like real-life confirmations of identity, you must look at questioning motives, needs, and keeping danger at arms-length. Online includes email, texting (sms), application chatbots, voice communicati...
Post a Comment
Read more

RACI, Cybersecurity and NICE Framework

The NICE framework from a RACI point of view The NICE framework ( NIST SP 800-181 rev. 1) established a standard approach for describing cybersecurity work, in order to help stakeholders share a common language and ideally improve how to identify, recruit, develop and retain talent. It breaks down cybersecurity work role categories into: Oversight and Governance; Design and Development; Implementation and Operation; Protection and Defense; Investigation.  Which is very cybersecurity-centric and not related to common tools for project management within companies. Especially smaller enterprises that do not have dedicated people to mange and coordinate cybersecurity needs. A  RACI chart  is   a project management tool used to define and clarify roles and responsibilities within a project team.   It stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, and visually represents who is responsible for what, who is accountable for the outcome, who needs to be c...
Post a Comment
Read more