Congrats on your PhD at Stanford, but some humility has to be part of the scientific process for sure. It looks like a lot of folks called "programmers" agree with the points in the post. If it's such a common experience that should tell you something about the state of affairs.
It's a blog post on the internet. Of course one should take it with a grain of salt. The same applies to any peer-reviewed article on software engineering for example.
Just yesterday, I was watching this interview with Adam Frank [0] one of the parts that stood out was his saying why "Why Science Cannot Ignore Human Experience" (I can't find the exact snippet, but apparently he has a book with the same title.
I'm not saying that the conclusions in the article are false. As a programmer, I prefer composition to inheritance, too. I'm saying that the justifications are presented using a scientific term of art (cognitive load), but the scientific evidence regarding cognitive load isn't sufficient to justify these claims.
I don't think the readers really care about the scientific term in this context. It's a shared experience that we care about and implicitly understand. It's probably worth "researching" (in the scientific sense).
It's a blog post on the internet. Of course one should take it with a grain of salt. The same applies to any peer-reviewed article on software engineering for example.
Just yesterday, I was watching this interview with Adam Frank [0] one of the parts that stood out was his saying why "Why Science Cannot Ignore Human Experience" (I can't find the exact snippet, but apparently he has a book with the same title.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhZAXXI83-4