Alternatives to OOP in D

[Serg Gini]

On Tuesday, 11 November 2025 at 07:12:38 UTC, Peter C wrote:
> Clearly correct code is necessary, but it's not sufficient.
>
> Code also needs to 'sustaining' correctness - through 
> maintenance, scaling, and change.
>
> Adair Dingle, in his award winning book from 2014, titled 
> 'Software Essentials Design and Construction', correctly 
> asserts that it is 'software maintenance' that dominates the 
> software life cycle.

k

> So patterns and paradigms are not just an arbitrary choice.

Yes they are

> They are the tools that provide for shared reasoning. They 
> should be chosen precisely because they provide the guardrails 
> that help to make 'correctness' easier to achieve and sustain 
> over the life-cycle of the code.

Different code has different purposes.
Also different languages desire less or more patters.
Patterns were mostly designed for Java/corporate world.
Maybe C# as well.
But not all code is like that. There is no "silver bullet" and 
patterns are definitely not that as well.

> 'Good code' (regardless of patterns and paradigms) structures 
> logic in a way that makes correctness easier to reason about -> 
> collaboratively.

If the majority of the people who work with the code is fine - 
it's fine.

> That is, if the person writing the code is the only one that 
> can reason about it, then is certainly *not* good code.

Sometimes it is.
Because nobody else will contribute to his project anyway.
So he is writing in a style that he likes.

> "The true measure of code quality, is that it's correctness is 
> easy to reason about collaboratively." - me, Nov 2025.

Something is missing in this definition is quality of 
collaborators.
Same code could be easy to reason for experienced devs and hard 
for 1st grade students.