angle – a bias or point of view
programming paradigms are silly
Programming paradigms are epistemic constructs that require little more than to be shown consistent on some level. They have little to do with the challenges facing software projects … provided the value is to be realized at runtime.
It's the PL designer & the tasked programmer with skin in the game. Critics on the sidelines take on zero risk by promoting OOP, FP, etc. easily claim vindication for the success (or failure) of a project implemented in some PL fitting the paradigm in question.
Given an implemented programming language, whatever paradigm most resembled is besides the point. The workings & idioms of the language always trump the characteristic properties of a paradigm. FP in Haskell is very different than FP in erlang; OOP in Ruby is very different than OOP in Java; Imperative C very different than imperative Perl.
B.S. heuristic: identify a false hypothesis to any given claim of a paradigm (independent of any implemented language).
Related B.S.: using english grammar & parts of speech to guide software organization.
One who argues a paradigm is either a fool or charlatan.
Any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae. – Kurt Vonnegut
s/novel/code/. Some folks are more concerned with histronics than improving things.
Price is what you pay. Value is what you get. – Warren Buffett
Conversely software projects are measured by the value, but ignorant of the (long-term) costs.
It's common to attribute longevity of something to its unsurpassed merit or strength. Often it's the effort to displace that drives the endurance.
Development beyond sufficiency is waste, possibly harm, likely to others. The skill is understanding what is sufficient.
The Culture Code – Clotaire Rapaille. What influences us on a cultural level. Insightful, entertaining & practical. Interesting model for describing cultures' relationships.