9 ms·

> Take a guess why you need this for methods to work the way you expect them This is not Google's fault. It is the fault of Java developers. They expect everyt

> Take a guess why you need this for methods to work the way you expect them This is not Google's fault. It is the fault of Java developers. They expect everything to work like Java. They expect to find Java APIs everywhere. I have never written classes like that. In fact, if I were to see a method being used in the way you are insinuating I would believe to have found a bug. I strongly dislike class-based object orientation in general. But I'm glad we do not have to deal with dozens of ways to do OOP in JavaScript anymore.

dmitriid 4y ago
> This is not Google's fault. It quite literally is. In there desire to push web components they also pushed quite a few (often questionable) solutions. See 17:59 here: https://youtu.be/y-8Lmg5Gobw https://youtu.be/y-8Lmg5Gobw > But I'm glad we do not have to deal with dozens of ways to do OOP in JavaScript anymore. There never were "dozens of ways". There always was only one: prototype based. And now there's this weird contraption on top that pretends its classes from C++-like languages (C++, Java, C# etc.) but is not.