3 ms·

Somewhat disagree - you still have 'types' in JS, but the runtime just sees maps instead of concrete types. The concept is still there, but you won't get an er

Somewhat disagree - you still have 'types' in JS, but the runtime just sees maps instead of concrete types. The concept is still there, but you won't get an error until runtime if you invalidate the models. At least with static languages the problems are made clear up front and prevent compilation. There are other limitations though, such as not being able to treat static types as a hashset at runtime, which can be good or bad thing depending on what camp you're in.

humanrebar 9y ago
The 'types' in JS don't typically include implementation implications as much as they do in more strongly typed languages. If your algorithm is looping through a set of widgets, you just need a container and things that look like widgets. In Java, C++, etc., you often are pulling in a type with baked-in assumptions about logging, DB access, etc.