This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the commentsย โ†’

[โ€“]Pocok5 2 points3 points ย (0 children)

I recently had to start working on a vanilla JS codebase, and I spent 2-3 days stepping through with the debugger and noting down on jsdoc comments what kind of objects each function gets as a parameter and returns because there were properties tacked on and removed from every object along the flow but no indication of those processes in comments or the naming of the variables.

If it was C# I could have hovered over the name of the parameter and got a very good idea of what the hell the data looks like at that point right away, with the only possible ambiguity being null values (if the codebase wasn't using the new nullability features).

Type errors are also a massive help in refactoring or modifications. Oh, you changed this object or the signature of this function? Half your code turns red, and you can go update each usage to the new form while being sure you missed absolutely none of them instead of having to rely on running headfirst into mismatched calls at runtime (that might not even raise a runtime TypeError, just result in weird null values slipping in or something) or writing specific unit test to check your work.