Originally Posted by
MK27
There might be a nugget of worthwhile information concealed in 2, but 4 I just find stupid.
IMO this usually amounts to C++ writers projecting a mentality onto C programmers and vice versa. Eg, "top down" and "bottom up" are language independent. It might be useful to understand what they mean in relation to one another, but to say when you are using javascript you should think top down whereas in lisp you should think bottom up is, like I said, a very stupid assertion.
The same mostly goes for "paradigmism" -- I'll use the term OOP because it's so common, but really what I mean is the use of classes and objects (specific related concepts) and not a "mentality". "Object oriented", "genericism", and "procedural" are terms that could be used in the context of all the programming languages I've ever used. I don't see the point in wasting much time on them. I'd rather read a discussion of actual syntax ("uses/techniques for templates", "uses/techniques for void*", etc) than someone prattling on about how to reify a rhetorical category like "paradigm".
I suppose I am being slightly patronizing in implying valthyx can't think about all this for him/herself, but only because I wanted to indicate not everyone is 100% a fan of the (IMO) much more patronizing rhetoric in play here, that it is just non-essential rhetoric and you can take it or leave it. Design concepts/methodology are great and can be discussed in relationship to each other, independent of language, or in alone in relationship to a specific language, but beyond that it's just throwing red herrings into a pipe.