Nevertheless, I consider OOP as an aspect of programming in the large; that is, as an aspect that logically follows programming in the small and requires sound knowledge of procedural programming.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Defining OO as based on the use of class hierarchies and virtual functions is also practical in that it provides some guidance as to where OO is likely to be successful.
Certainly not every good program is object-oriented, and not every object-oriented program is good.
Programming is one of the most difficult branches of applied mathematics; the poorer mathematicians had better remain pure mathematicians.
I find languages that support just one programming paradigm constraining.
The most important precedents deal with the whole idea of symbolic programming - the notion of setting up symbolic expressions that can represent anything one wants, and then having functions that operate on both their structure and content.
I always considered programming as being like modern-day wizardry. You could think of things in your mind and then make them happen.
A programming language is low level when its programs require attention to the irrelevant.
Programming is usually taught by examples.
A programming language is for thinking about programs, not for expressing programs you've already thought of. It should be a pencil, not a pen.
Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have originated in California.