The people know that programming BM without OOP
is hopeless. Because everyone uses it.
Many started using Bmax procedurally and many of those who did are still here using OO techniques. Personally, I don't think that means Bmax procedural aspects are poor rather the advantage of OO becomes more evident.
And so there
is no sourcecode they can read without learning it.
or the 'glass half-full' answer, if you want to learn OO and use Bmax to it's fullest advantage then there's a lot of source code.is no sourcecode they can read without learning it.
And they can't ask questions because the anwers will be in OOP.
"Plz, can you translate the code to procedural programming.
I dont't understand it."
Impossible.
Everybody else who came from B2D/B3D/B+ or Bmax without an OO background managed it so it is possible.
Ideally, questions should cover topics short enough that OO techniques are not really a factor. The problems I have seen is when somebody posts their full code and says "Plz fix" and the design is broken rather than any command they're using.
The response is normally "You need to redesign"
To OOP or not to OOP; this is the question.
To OOP in my view.
<edit> changed some terrible grammatical mistakes but not the content.