TITLE: I'm Not Correcting Someone Who Was Wrong on the Internet
AUTHOR: Eugene Wallingford
DATE: October 10, 2017  4:10 PM
DESC: 
-----
BODY:
 Yesterday, I wrote an entire blog entry that I <TT>rm</TT>'ed
 before posting.  I had read a decent article on a certain flavor
 of primitive obsession and design alternatives, which ended with
 what I thought was a misleading view of object-oriented
 programming.  My blog entry set out to right this wrong.

 In a rare moment of self-restraint, I resisted the urge to
 correct
<A HREF="https://xkcd.com/386/">
   someone who was wrong on the internet</A>.
 There is no sense in subjecting you to that.  Instead, I'll just
 say that I like both OOP and functional programming, and use
 both regularly.  I remain, in my soul, object-oriented.

 On a more positive note, this morning I read an old article that
 made me smile,
<A HREF="http://yogthos.net/posts/2013-08-18-Why-I-m-Productive-in-Clojure.html">
   Why I'm Productive in Clojure</A>.
 I don't use Clojure, but this short piece brought to mind many
 of the same feelings in me, but about Smalltalk.  Interestingly,
 the sources of my feelings are similar to the author's: the right
 amount of syntax, facilities for meta-programming, interactive
 development.  The article gave me a feeling that is the opposite
 of schadenfreude: pleasure from the pleasure of others.  Some
 Buddhists call this
<A HREF="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudita">
   mudita</A>.
 I felt mudita after reading this blog entry.  Rock on, Clojure
 dude.
-----