4 ms·
Heh. Arguably JS itself "invented a half-baked, partial re-implementation of objects/classes"... _in their class implementation_. God it drives me nuts that th
by ajkjk 4y ago
Heh. Arguably JS itself "invented a half-baked, partial re-implementation of objects/classes"... _in their class implementation_.
God it drives me nuts that the language will allow you to spread a class into an object and it will take the properties but not the methods.
- yamtaddle 4y agoOh, absolutely. Pretty much every distinctive feature of prototypal OO is best classed as "please, never ever actually use this". Adding the "class" sugar and general agreement to pretend the prototypal stuff isn't there, though, made JS OO usable-enough. But yeah, it's not great.
- H1Supreme 4y agoExactly! If the Javascript implementation was better, React probably never would have had to come up with Hooks in the first place.
- imbnwa 4y agoYou can solve the problem Hooks purported to solve in plain, idiomatic JavaScript with classes[0] [0]https://raganwald.com/2016/07/20/prefer-composition-to-inheritance.html https://raganwald.com/2016/07/20/prefer-composition-to-inher...
- ajkjk 4y agoThis thread may have an OP who prefers classes, but I'm for one 100% in favor of hooks. You could struggle and suffer to solve them with classes, or you could move on to something better.