The subject of the research is object-oriented programming (OOP) as a historically established disciplinary matrix of software engineering, which throughout the late 20th and early 21st centuries defined the main principles of thinking and practices in software system development. The evolution of OOP is examined: from research innovations of the 1960s and 1970s through institutionalization and unconditional dominance in the 1980s to the 2000s, to a phase of technological maturity, gradual hybridization with other approaches, and loss of ontological priority in the multiparadigm environment of the 2010s and 2020s. Particular attention is paid to why OOP, despite losing its status as a universal model, maintains significant institutional stability and a profound influence on contemporary engineering culture, including modes of thought, professional values, and the organization of collective development. The methodological foundation comprises T. Kuhn's concept of disciplinary matrices and J. Dosi's model of technological trajectories. Historical-technical reconstruction of the lifecycle of the paradigm, analysis of anomalies, and hybridization in the context of cognitive-normative attitudes of the professional community are applied. Typological parallels with features of post-nonclassical rationality are used instrumentally, without asserting direct conceptual continuity. The scientific novelty lies in the integration of T. Kuhn's disciplinary matrix concept and J. Dosi's technological trajectory model for analyzing object-oriented programming as a coherent engineering paradigm. The research reveals the reasons for OOP's loss of status as a universal normative model while maintaining institutional stability. This stability relied not only on technical solutions but also on enduring cognitive-normative attitudes of the professional community that gradually became part of the engineering culture. OOP completes the lifecycle of the technological trajectory, transitioning from a universal foundation to one of contextually limited practices in a multiparadigm environment. The findings allow for a better understanding of the dynamics of modern programming paradigms at the early stages of their institutionalization and for reflecting on the general patterns of the change of engineering paradigms.
Andrei Vladimirovich Zabrodin (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: