• anyhow2503@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    5 months ago

    I haven’t used TypeScript in a classically OOP way and it never felt like I was being urged to do so either.

    • Armand1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I’ve worked on projects with 10 000+ lines of typescript and maybe 3 classes total.

        • Armand1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Of course, but OOP is typically about putting methods on classes, inheritance of behaviour etc.

          JS Objects aren’t typically used that way, they tend to be used as pure data containers. At least, that’s how we mostly use them.

          Occasionally, we’ll use objects to simplify passing multiple arguments including arrow functions, but I’d say that doesn’t really count unless the arrow function mutates the object it’s a part of.

          • Ethan@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Of course, but OOP is typically about putting methods on classes, inheritance of behaviour etc.

            You’re referring to one subtype of OOP. That may be what most people mean when they say OOP, but that doesn’t make it correct. Object-oriented programming is programming with objects, which does not require inheritance or classes.

            • Miaou@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              With such a broad definition you could call even Haskell an oop language

              • Ethan@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                So you’re arguing that “Object oriented” shouldn’t apply to languages that are oriented around objects?

      • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Huh? I’ve worked with TypeScript + React for the last 5yrs and the only time I see OOP is when someone’s done something wrong.

        Maybe you’re thinking of old react with class based components?

        • toastal@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Proving that adding the class keyword to the ECMAScript spec was a mistake that leads folks down a path they should not travel 🙃

          • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I completely agree. I taught JS/TS for 5yrs and I always emphasised that the ‘class’ keyword was just syntactic sugar for what was already available in prototype inheritance of JS.