The controller pattern is awful (and other OO heresy)

Re:The controller pattern is awful (and other OO heresy) by BeefWellington on Monday July 10, 2023 @10:45PM (#36675847)

> You've never seen Java (or C#) code where a bunch of unrelated functions belong to some meaningless class like "Utility"?

I guess I don't see the problem here; what's wrong with this idea?

I've seen people claim "It's not OOP" but without any ability to explain why and I'd love to see the practical difference.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The controller pattern is awful (and other OO heresy) by wizofaus on Tuesday July 11, 2023 @12:33AM (#36676448)

I don't have any problem with it not being OOP, but I do have a problem with the abuse of the concept of a "class". I also think it's rarely the ideal way to organise your code (even if the .NET core framework has examples of it - WebUtility/HttpUtility etc., and the JRE may well do too, though I can't see any obvious examples in the java.util namespace).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The controller pattern is awful (and other OO heresy) by BeefWellington on Tuesday July 11, 2023 @08:22AM (#36679972)

The entire java.util namespace is the example here.

Using static methods on a class seems perfectly fine to me; that's what they're there for. If you have a handy utility class to work around problems in the standard library, then that's an issue with the standard library; Java has this but has gotten better over the years.

[ Parent | on HN ]