I realized additionally is that Armstrong has other complaints about OOP like inheritance. What I said above in that classes and functions are like a self-contained programs with structs and functions. I wasn't considering inheritance, but once you start inheriting it gets murky:
Joe Armstrong: Because the problem with object-oriented languages is they've got all this implicit environment that they carry around with them. You wanted a banana but what you got was a gorilla holding the banana and the entire jungle
But some of his other complaints don't feel as right to me:
I do love the implementation of Erlang and the reliability. I think it would fun to try actors and see if it changes how I view software engineering. I bet it would.
Joe Armstrong: Because the problem with object-oriented languages is they've got all this implicit environment that they carry around with them. You wanted a banana but what you got was a gorilla holding the banana and the entire jungle
But some of his other complaints don't feel as right to me:
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/OO_programming/why_oo_suck...
I do love the implementation of Erlang and the reliability. I think it would fun to try actors and see if it changes how I view software engineering. I bet it would.