2 ms·
It's just never been a problem for me, I guess? I know how it works in JS, so I either ignore it or use it to my advantage (the JS equivalent of overloading). Y
by gkoberger 13y ago
It's just never been a problem for me, I guess? I know how it works in JS, so I either ignore it or use it to my advantage (the JS equivalent of overloading). You seem to come from a more strongly-typed background, but I've never once found the way JS handles it to be "catastrophic".
- Peaker 13y agoHow do you ignore it? Ignoring it means accepting cryptic bugs that result from signature changes. You say "use to your advantage", but what's the advantage? You could have a "*args" like Python, and get the benefits without the (huge) drawback. The typing debate is mostly about how much effort we should exert to catch errors at compile time rather than run time. In JS, it is much worse: It defers error catching forever, and never even catches them at all! It converts them to silent bugs, instead :(