While often derided for its verbosity and perceived outdatedness, Objective-C possesses a unique charm for some developers. Its Smalltalk-inspired message-passing paradigm, dynamic nature, and human-readable syntax foster a sense of playfulness and expressiveness that can be missing in more rigid languages. This article argues that Objective-C's idiosyncrasies, including its use of square brackets and descriptive method names, contribute to a more approachable and understandable coding experience, particularly for those coming from a less technical background. Despite its decline in popularity since Swift's arrival, Objective-C's enduring legacy and distinct character continue to resonate with a dedicated community who appreciate its subjective appeal.
The Wired article, "The Subjective Charms of Objective-C," delves into the enduring appeal of Objective-C, a programming language often dismissed as archaic and overly verbose in the modern development landscape dominated by its successor, Swift. The author meticulously explores the facets of Objective-C that, despite its perceived shortcomings, continue to captivate a dedicated community of programmers. This enduring affection stems not from mere nostalgia, but from a deep appreciation for the language's distinctive characteristics.
One key aspect highlighted is Objective-C's explicit message-passing paradigm. Unlike many contemporary languages that favor a more streamlined, dot-notation syntax, Objective-C retains the square-bracket syntax which clearly delineates the act of sending a message to an object. This explicitness, while seemingly cumbersome, offers a level of transparency and understanding of the underlying mechanics that some developers find valuable, fostering a deeper grasp of how objects interact. The author argues this verbose nature can actually enhance code readability and comprehension, especially in complex projects.
Furthermore, the article underscores the significant influence of Smalltalk on Objective-C's design philosophy. This heritage imbues the language with a dynamic runtime and a powerful introspection capability, enabling developers to perform operations and manipulations at runtime not easily achievable in statically typed languages. This flexibility is a key differentiator, allowing for powerful metaprogramming techniques and runtime adaptability. The author emphasizes how this dynamic nature, inherited from Smalltalk, contributes to Objective-C's unique power and flexibility.
The piece also acknowledges the perceived verbosity of Objective-C, addressing the common criticism leveled against its syntax. However, the author counters this by arguing that this verbosity, often viewed as a negative, can actually contribute to clarity and maintainability. The explicit nature of method calls, for example, can make it easier to understand the flow of logic within a program, particularly for larger and more intricate codebases.
Finally, the author highlights the enduring presence of Objective-C in numerous legacy codebases, especially within the Apple ecosystem. This entrenched status ensures that the language will remain relevant for the foreseeable future, as maintaining and extending these existing projects necessitates a continued understanding and proficiency in Objective-C. This continued relevance is a testament to the language's robustness and the sheer volume of existing software built upon it. In conclusion, the article presents a nuanced perspective on Objective-C, celebrating its unique strengths and demonstrating how its perceived flaws can, in fact, be seen as advantages by those who appreciate its particular approach to software development. It suggests that despite the rise of Swift, Objective-C continues to hold a unique and valuable place in the programming world.
Summary of Comments ( 32 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43687966
HN commenters largely agree that Objective-C's verbosity, while initially appearing cumbersome, contributes to its readability and maintainability. Several users appreciate the explicit nature of message passing and how it clarifies code intention. Some argue that modern Objective-C, with features like literals and blocks, addresses many of the verbosity complaints. The dynamic nature of the language and the power of its runtime are also highlighted as benefits. A few commenters express nostalgia for Objective-C, contrasting it with Swift, which they perceive as less enjoyable or flexible, despite its modern syntax. There's also a discussion around the challenges of learning Objective-C and the impact of Apple's transition to Swift.
The Hacker News post "The Subjective Charms of Objective-C" (linking to a Wired article about the same topic) generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters sharing their experiences and opinions on the language.
A prevailing sentiment is nostalgia and appreciation for Objective-C's unique characteristics, particularly its verbosity and Smalltalk-inspired message-passing paradigm. One commenter fondly recalls the clarity and explicitness of Objective-C's method names, contrasting them with the more concise but sometimes less obvious naming conventions in Swift. They argue that the verbosity, while initially appearing cumbersome, ultimately enhances readability and understandability, especially in larger codebases.
This theme of readability is echoed by others, who highlight how Objective-C's explicitness makes it easier to understand the flow of execution and the interactions between objects. The square bracket syntax for message passing is specifically mentioned as a visual aid that clarifies the relationships between different parts of the code.
However, not all comments are purely positive. Some acknowledge the downsides of Objective-C's verbosity, admitting it can lead to more typing and potentially make the code appear more cluttered. One commenter humorously describes the language as "beautifully verbose," acknowledging both its strengths and weaknesses.
Several commenters discuss the transition to Swift and the mixed feelings it evoked. While recognizing Swift's modern features and improved performance, some express a sense of loss for the distinct character of Objective-C. They describe Swift as feeling more generic and less expressive, even if it is objectively a more efficient language. The sentiment is not one of outright rejection of Swift, but rather a wistful remembrance of Objective-C's unique qualities.
The discussion also touches on the historical context of Objective-C, with some commenters mentioning its NeXT roots and its role in the development of macOS and iOS. This context adds another layer of appreciation for the language, viewing it as a significant piece of computing history.
Finally, the practicality of learning Objective-C in the present day is briefly debated. While acknowledging that Swift is now the dominant language for Apple development, some suggest that understanding Objective-C can still be valuable for maintaining or interacting with legacy codebases.
In summary, the comments reflect a mix of nostalgia, appreciation for Objective-C's unique features, and acknowledgement of its limitations. While recognizing Swift's superiority in many aspects, the commenters express a fondness for Objective-C's distinct character and the role it played in shaping the Apple ecosystem.