Sign up ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free.

I came across the following supposed Dijkstra quote on object-orientation

Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have originated in California

However even my source isn't convinced the quote is genuine. Does anyone know whether it's genuine, and if so what the context he was speaking in was? I'm aware of the shortcomings of OOP, just wondered which one was in his mind at the time.

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by Mark Trapp Aug 7 '11 at 9:40

Questions on Programmers Stack Exchange are expected to relate to software development within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

It sounds like one of Dijkstra's quotes. But even then .. it could have been made up, but is across the internet always quotes as one of the things Dijkstra hass said. –  vstrien Aug 7 '11 at 7:56
Hi Tom, Programmers.SE is for conceptual questions in software development; it's not a fact-checking site. Please see our FAQ for more information. –  user8 Aug 7 '11 at 9:41
@Mark - gaining some insight into the context of the quote does fit this site. –  JeffO Aug 7 '11 at 10:53
Dijakstra seems to have been a bit of a stirrer. Treat some of the supposed quotes in that light. –  quickly_now Aug 7 '11 at 11:00
@quickly_now agreed - I'd just be interested in hearing his argument for such a statement (if indeed it is his) –  Thom Carver Aug 7 '11 at 11:42

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Well Google and I have drawn a blank; the closest I could find was

For those who have wondered: I don't think object-oriented programming is a structuring paradigm that meets my standards of elegance.

Which has substantially less bite than the original; however it wouldn't be the first time a famous Dijkstra quote was attributed incorrectly ( see last paragraph)

share|improve this answer
Please put external links in full. This mean you do not have to follow the link. –  user1249 Aug 7 '11 at 9:19
Done, although I find it less readable now, and mouseover-ing the link should show you the URL. –  Thom Carver Aug 7 '11 at 9:42
Are you talking about Wirth changing the title? –  dbasnett Aug 7 '11 at 13:59
@dbasnett yes - I was unaware before coming across that link in my research that "Goto considered harmful" was not Dijkstra's own phrase. –  Thom Carver Aug 7 '11 at 16:01

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.