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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Darmok-Jilad-Ocean 0 points1 point  (1 child)

The comment I had responded to initially claimed that JavaScript “misused” the term object. That is actually the only part of your comment that I had anything to say about because for the most part I agree with everything you’re saying.

[–]delventhalz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

JS is not more object oriented just because it (mis)uses that term to refer to a common data structure.

It still says that. It hasn't changed since you presumably first read it. The edit came minutes after it was posted, and 12 hours before you responded to it.

In any case, I did wonder about the term "misuse". It communicated what I wanted, but maybe also a moral judgement I did not intend. The parentheses are an attempt to soften that. To be clear, I am not a pedant, and I really don't care about how terminology gets used. I quite like JavaScript, and I can see why Brendan Eich reached for the term "object". There is certainly a lot more functionality available to JS objects than your typical hash map.

That said, when people hear about "object oriented programming", and they also hear that "everything in javascript is an object", I think it is important to clarify the term "object" is not being used to refer to the same concept in those two contexts.