I like OOP but I dislike some patterns of object-oriented design. If you've ever seen those memes where they make base classes for the most niche things that could just be implemented with a single function, you know what I'm on about. Instead of a "greeter" class just use a function that prints the format "Hello, %s." trust me. On that topic, I hate getters and setters, they are provided by the language with the '.' and '->' operators typically. Why make a function that will always be inlined like a getter or setter? Oh, and variable privacy. It's actually fine, but I need to be able to make hack code because I suck, so I always make things public.
I also like the C3 programming language, (it doesn't have a wikipedia page,) and I even don't care about the rather harsh naming rules. What I do care about is the pointer dereference assumptions. They removed the '->' operator which is allowing the compiler to assume things for you. Yes, the compiler sometimes knows where to put semicolons but that doesn't mean it's always right. It's the same with C3's dynamic pointer dereference. I would never use the '*&' operator otherwise (dereferencing a reference... because otherwise the compiler crashes... help...)
ASM is also really fun. 6502 ASM in pretty good (first one I learned) but obviously x86 is better. If you want a sort of "soft" ASM, try LLVM. It lets you alloc stuff easier but it is still a sort of assembly langauge.
I DON'T LIKE WRITING SYMBOLS LIKE WORDS COST MONEY
