Encapsulation, a fundamental principle of object-oriented programming, has long been touted as a solution for organizing and structuring code. However, in practice, encapsulation can sometimes lead to code that is harder to understand, modify, and maintain. In this blog post, we will delve into the shortcomings of encapsulation and explore alternative perspectives on code organization, focusing on four key points.
Encapsulation encourages developers to group data and behavior into objects based on the principle of "single responsibility." While this approach may seem intuitive, it can result in a code structure that does not align well with the problem at hand. The rigid boundaries imposed by encapsulation may force the code into artificial and convoluted structures, making it more challenging to reason about and maintain. Instead of prematurely imposing structure, starting with a more flexible and free-form approach can allow for a better fit between the code and the problem domain.
Encapsulation often leads to the creation of abstract entities such as service classes, manager classes, and other abstract classes. While these entities aim to encapsulate behaviors, they can lack clear connections to the actual functionality of the program. This abstraction can confuse code readers and hinder their understanding of the codebase. By focusing on the actual problem being solved, we can avoid the proliferation of such artificial entities and maintain a codebase that is more aligned with the real-world domain.
In object-oriented design, functionality is typically split into multiple methods across different classes, often scattered across various files. This fracturing of functionality can make it challenging to locate and comprehend the complete logic of a particular functionality. The traditional approach of encapsulating behaviors into separate classes may inadvertently disperse the codebase, making it harder to follow the flow of execution. Instead, considering the natural sequence of operations and keeping related code closer together can enhance code readability and maintainability.
Encapsulation can introduce philosophical dilemmas when mapping behaviors to data types. Often, additional data types are introduced solely to accommodate specific behaviors, even if those data types do not naturally align with the problem domain. This excessive abstraction can complicate the codebase and make it harder to understand. Emphasizing a more pragmatic approach that prioritizes clear and straightforward code can help avoid the pitfalls of unnecessary abstractions.
Encapsulation, as traditionally practiced in object-oriented programming, may not always provide the expected benefits of code organization and maintainability. The mismatch between code structure and problem, the prevalence of abstract entities, the fragmentation of functionality, and the tendency toward excessive abstraction can all hinder the comprehension and modification of codebases. Instead, developers should embrace a more flexible approach that allows for the natural organization of code, focusing on clarity, simplicity, and a closer alignment with the problem at hand. By questioning established practices and exploring alternative perspectives, we can foster codebases that are easier to understand, maintain, and evolve.