alt Hacker NewsYeah you're right. It's an oversimplification to say components in physical engineering domains have no memory. I was thinking about how logic gates are reasoned about. But that's not the exact point... It's that the argument is usually that OOP cannot decrease coupling. I can't see how exactly. OOP seems to strike a balance between good enough modularity and expressive power enough to keep your system directionally loosely coupled. Infact, I'd say that, I my experience, lots of the coupling between modules is inherent to the 'specifics' of the system's design requirements itself. This is where sometimes within the same logical subsystem/component you could find multiple design patterns all deployed in the bid to reduce coupling. I don't think this is OOP's fault directly as opposed to the 'devil that is in the details'. But maybe I don't have enough experience or exposure yet (I'm a 2nd-year junior)
No it is not a fault of OOP, it is just that OOP does not really provide the tools to help either. It is the fault of people with the wrong expectations or of those trying to sell snake oil.
OOP allows to create decoupled systems but it doesn't help in creating them. It is not an inherent property of the paradigm, but many people sold it as such.
"Use OOP and your application is now magically more modular! Buy my latest book to find out how!"
Since you mentioned you are a junior I guess this sort of nonsense is from before your time. No worries, that just means you won't have stupid dogma shoved down your throat. Use whatever paradigm if it helps you and avoid whatever gets in the way.