[kalekold]

If OOP is over-complicating your code, you're using it wrong. OOP is a tool to manage complexity.

Functional programming, in my experience, created much more complicated code because it seems like the authors like to be a clever as possible.

[jalapenos]

Once you zoom out to the bigger picture of dozens of devs writing the code rather than yourself, its more a matter of "statistically, if I recommend functional over OOP, how simple will the code be a year from now".

But granted it needs to be part of a broader pressure to keep things simple, otherwise devs will like you say, find a way to overcomplicate.

[prmph]

Indeed. Although I have mostly stopped using OOP in most of my code, I sometimes encounter certain classes of problems that are exceedingly complicated to solve in a purely functional way, but that are a breeze to solve using OOP, believe it or not.

One can mix functional and OOP code well by compartmentalizing the parts of the code that are in OOP style, and situating it in an overall functional context. For example, the methods of a class can certainly be written in a very functional style, and classes themselves can be instantiated within functions.

The mark of a skilled developer is to know which paradigm is the best to solve a particular problem, just like the choice of a data structure can greatly affect simplicity of code to address a problem.

[yen223]

> I sometimes encounter certain classes of problems that are exceedingly complicated to solve in a purely functional way, but that are a breeze to solve using OOP, believe it or not.

What kinds of problems, if I may ask?

[epgui]

Are you confusing "complicated" with "unfamiliar"?