"A modern developer need not know the Gang of Four "Design Patterns",
but they should at least have forgotten them."

Agree? 🤔

 boost appreciated, let's find out!

Yep, still relevant
34.7%
No, it's not 1994
35.5%
The what patterns? (see replies)
29.8%
Poll ended at .

@noboilerplate I voted yes, but that’s not to say that all of them aged well.

I use Builder and Strategy pattterns almost daily though.

It’s all about finding the right tool for the job. And learning about more of them (even if they’re less useful recently) will also be beneficial to that task.

@zethtren yeah, I'm along the same lines, but I wonder if, say Builder, would even need a name if we were all in the habit of casually returning closures from functions... 🤔

@noboilerplate Named or not it’s still a behavior I feel.

It’s nice to be able to talk about things like this quickly.

Phrases like Mutating methods, methods, associated functions, functions, monads, etc make it really easy to communicate a design. More importantly, they make it easier to reason through the initial design.

All functions returning closures would be an interesting world indeed. It might be a barrier for some to have to think abstractly before thinking at all.