1. 5
  1.  

  2. 3

    Could we get a summary or transcript?

    1. 6

      I’d tl;dr as:

      • OO (defined ala Alan Kay: encapsulation / message passing / late binding) is a technical detail
      • OO has nothing to do with how “analyze stuff and the way we think”

      They then, in a very disjointed way, recapitulate the ’90s - ’00s agile and DDD movements with all their design principles whilst also haphazardly making references to Turing machines, lambdas, and Simula.

      I’m trying to be charitable.

      1. 2

        I would add that there’s some interesting back and forth around minute 22 distinguishing OOP proper from Object Oriented Design and possibly Object Oriented Analysis. I think it would be fair to summarize this as saying that Uncle Bob doesn’t really think there’s anything much to criticize about OOP but some of the things done at the design and analytic levels can be problematic. This goes from around the beginning of minute 22 into minute 26 but obviously the conversation drifts around a bit.

        There’s some interesting criticism of inheritance in minute 26.

        Just a rant about definitions here but, I don’t think those Youtube “transcripts” really qualify as a transcript: it’s just the subtitle file and doesn’t include punctuation or speaker attribution as a true transcript should. Subtitles are expected to be viewed on the screen so contextual information about who is speaking (from the visual) is available. Transcriptions should stand on their own and contain notes about that contextual information so that the transcript can be read as its own text.

        1. 2

          Also those auto-generated subtitles are awful in my experience.

      2. 2

        There’s an autogenerated transcript on YouTube.

      3. 2
        1. 2

          CW: Robert Martin