> It's somewhat just the return of global variables.
No, it's not. This is far from the only objection/disagreement I have with the article, but I can take almost everything else as either opinions or convenient examples in support of those opinions.
That sentence, though, just stuck with me as particularly odd because, among other things, using classes doesn't make you more likely to use global variables than using functions exclusively. And I'm not even talking about Python in specific.
Anyhow, it had been a while, I think, since a post pitting FP against OOP had reached the front page, and thus causing yet another iteration of that traditional flamewar in the comments. Guess it was due.
The author doesn't mean literally globally scoped variables, but more generally data with a larger scope than necessary. For example, you might have instance methods that only need a small part of the "self" object, but they get access to the entire thing.
No, it's not. This is far from the only objection/disagreement I have with the article, but I can take almost everything else as either opinions or convenient examples in support of those opinions.
That sentence, though, just stuck with me as particularly odd because, among other things, using classes doesn't make you more likely to use global variables than using functions exclusively. And I'm not even talking about Python in specific.
Anyhow, it had been a while, I think, since a post pitting FP against OOP had reached the front page, and thus causing yet another iteration of that traditional flamewar in the comments. Guess it was due.