oop Memes

The AUDACITY of business engineering programs! 😤 First they LURE you in with fancy business talk, then SURPRISE! Programming lectures appear out of NOWHERE! You start getting excited about Java and OOP like "Ooh, I'm a real programmer now!" Then BAM! 💥 They hit you with the ULTIMATE BETRAYAL - coding ON PAPER! No compiler, no autocomplete, just you and your PATHETIC human memory trying to remember if semicolons go at the end of every line. The CRUELTY is simply BEYOND COMPREHENSION! It's like being taught to swim and then being tested in a desert. DIABOLICAL!

The perfect double entendre doesn't exi— In programming, inheritance lets a class acquire properties from a parent class. In real life, inheritance lets you acquire properties from your parents. Coincidence? I think not. The fastest way to build wealth is apparently the same whether you're writing Java or living in society - just extend the right class.

The programmer's brain is truly a special place. While normal people are saying "don't treat women like objects," our code-addled minds are literally instantiating new Woman objects with a constructor. That syntax is straight from the OOP playbook—creating a new instance with the classic women = new Women(); pattern. It's that beautiful moment when your professional deformation makes you physically unable to interpret anything outside of programming paradigms. Your brain has been permanently rewired to see the world as classes, objects, and inheritance hierarchies.

The ultimate functional programming dad joke has arrived! In OOP, we obsess over objects, but functional programmers just smugly call them "side effects" and try to avoid them like that one relative at Thanksgiving dinner. The punchline works on multiple levels because side effects in functional programming are operations that modify state outside their scope—exactly what pure functional programming tries to eliminate. It's like watching someone build an elaborate sandcastle while promising not to touch the sand. Whoever made this meme definitely mutated some global variables in their day.

Two types of inheritance in the wild: OOP inheritance where classes inherit properties, and then there's the family kind where you inherit legacy COBOL code last touched by someone's mother in the 90s. Talk about technical debt with actual family drama! This poor soul didn't just inherit methods and properties—they inherited decades-old spaghetti code with a side of maternal guilt. And somewhere, a CS professor is crying because this is definitely not what they meant by "parent-child relationships" in class diagrams.

When someone asks if you know any programming paradigm beyond OOP, and your brain immediately goes to "FU"... which conveniently stands for "Functional Programming." The perfect accidental programmer comeback! After 15 years of watching junior devs make everything an object, I've learned that sometimes the best answer to "how should we architect this?" is indeed just "FU." Pure functions, no side effects, and immutability - it's like telling your stateful code to take a hike.

Rejecting modern OOP encapsulation with its fancy "getters and setters" in favor of the raw, chaotic energy of old-school BASIC's "peekers and pokers" - where memory manipulation was done with bare hands and a complete disregard for safety. Like choosing to fix your server with a hammer instead of proper tools because "that's how grandpa did it."

The eternal relationship paradox for coders. She's upset about being treated like an object, while he's literally offering to elevate her to class status. Talk about a communication breakdown worthy of a Stack Overflow question! In object-oriented programming, objects are instances of classes, so he's technically offering a promotion in the hierarchy. Sadly, his girlfriend doesn't appreciate the distinction between being instantiated versus being a blueprint. Marriage counselors should really learn programming fundamentals before taking on dev clients.