Although I never use Basic and Pascal now, it was good to learn the basics of programming with a "simple" language, I don't know if I would understand object-oriented programming with 15 years... But yes, school's informatics lessons can be much better.

I still don't understand the point of OOP (even after passing "Advanced programming" and "Object-oriented programming" courses that were dedicated to it). OOP look like camouflaged procedural programming that has been invented to hide how people don't understand procedural programming. Eventually every machine code is procedural, which directly implies that OOP is actually procedural, no matter how much people try to insist otherwise.

And besides, the ultimate points of OOP are stuff like capsulation and interfaces, which are direct waste of CPU time (all those context switching, all those pointer dereferencing, all those (often pointless) function calls, ...).

Without a very good optimizer built into compilers OOP=waste of CPU time.

Ah, maybe I just expect too much of it.

Yeah we started with Imagine (Logo) which was like -> forward 30, right 50 etc...
The problem - i was 13 or 14 years old and i already started with PHP, so it was pure pain to do in such a language like that... next we had Delphi which is something like Pascal with OOP... And Delphi is used on our Universities too

The unluck of Pascal or Delphi was -> almost immediately after they were published came out revolutionary C and then C++, so they wasnt used so much.. but they were used on schoools :X

Natirips OOP, afaik, is normal procedure programming but with such a things like classes and data types and structures..

Thread successfully hijacked!

Natirips OOP, afaik, is normal procedure programming but with such a things like classes and data types and structures..

I still don't understand the point of OOP (even after passing "Advanced programming" and "Object-oriented programming" courses that were dedicated to it). OOP look like camouflaged procedural programming that has been invented to hide how people don't understand procedural programming. Eventually every machine code is procedural, which directly implies that OOP is actually procedural, no matter how much people try to insist otherwise.

And besides, the ultimate points of OOP are stuff like capsulation and interfaces, which are direct waste of CPU time (all those context switching, all those pointer dereferencing, all those (often pointless) function calls, ...).

Without a very good optimizer built into compilers OOP=waste of CPU time.

oO there are many benefits of using OOP, at least from a design POV, especially on bigger collaborative projects.
Wasting CPU time ? Come on, compilers are good, and look nowadays we run full applications in script languages, CPU is not a problem and costs nothing. However, OOP helps to code clean programs, reusable components, faster development time... And development costs are greater than CPU costs, so the equation is easy to solve...
Look modern game engines, they are almost all coded in OO languages, do you really think they run slowly ?

When I compare a typical racing game that runs with 10fps on lowest details in 640x480 and 16-bit color on a dual-core 2GHz CPU with an advanced graphics card and then remember that there were 3D racing games running at 40MHz 80386 with 8MB or RAM in same resolution and no 3D accelerated cards with 15fps, yes modern OO-based engines suck big time.