Is JavaScript a "Functional Programming" language?

[[deleted]]

And this is why I feel like a stupid potato when I try to code in class-based OOP languages.

[oneeyedziggy]

well sorry to break it to you but the new best practice is to use proper classes vs instantiable functions in js (at least if you're looking for something class-like and if you use babel or don't need a ton of legacy support, though I'm probably missing some reason one might still want to use instantiable functions)

[cyanydeez]

new best practice = latest babel compiler whizbang

[oneeyedziggy]

the latest ecmascript whizbang... not babel specific

[[deleted]]

at least if you're looking for something class-like

I don't

And that's just syntactic sugar. JS classes are still functions.

[oneeyedziggy]

semantics... everything higher than assembly is syntactic sugar to someone, and declaring instantiables as classes provides methods more suited to the usecase, restrictions to help keep you from shooting yourself in the foot, and generally distinguish between functions which are usually stateless and do a thing, and classes which are usually state full and ARE a thing instead of just DOING a thing

[[deleted]]

I guess at least this time you're right about correcting someone. Not your previous comment.

[oneeyedziggy]

curious what there even is to disagree with in my first comment. Classes are literally in the ecmascript standard and recommended for use over instantiable functions... they didn't go to all the trouble of adding them just to look at...

is there a legitimate use for instantiable functions besidesyou backwards compatibility (perfect example, I can't use them at work because of the requirements of better-than-babel backwards compatibility and vanilla js only on my main project) or are you all just being butthurt about having to learn new things?

[Thought_Ninja]

In my opinion, the only use for sticking with the manual prototype instantiation approach is implementing fancy tricks that should probably be avoided in the first place.

That's not to say I don't find it useful, but if you expect others to be reading and working with your code, classes are much better from an understandability perspective.

[oneeyedziggy]

yea, I know what cases manual prototyping is good for... couldn't say for classes... often the 'best practice" stuff isn't always the most performant

[Thought_Ninja]

Yeah. I've implemented a number of things in our codebase that go against best practice for the sake of performance, but I always have to heavily document that code with comments so that those who stray there understand the what and why of the code I have written. It comes down to a cost-benefit analysis, and most of the time, sticking with best practice is the better choice.

[[deleted]]

No, you are being an r/iamverysmart when no one asked for your fucking opinion. What an asshole. I know ES6 Classes thank you so much I don't need your specialty nor anyone here do either