I was asked this question in an interview sitting a couple of months ago. I'm pretty sure some of you really ever thought of changing something in JS language.
I will be happy to know your opinion in the comment.
I was asked this question in an interview sitting a couple of months ago. I'm pretty sure some of you really ever thought of changing something in JS language.
I will be happy to know your opinion in the comment.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
DATE!!!
The date and time in javascript is so messed up, the community had to create libraries for basic tasks like date and time management.
Luckily, there is a new API coming called the Temporal API. Fingers Crossed 🤞
Great update!
Ohh yeah, I'm aware.. I agree that they are kinda unnecesary, but they make my life a bit easier. I fricking hated constructor functions, but now I kinda enjoy working with "classes". I prefer not to if I can, but sometimes I need to
Couldn't we also consider that high-level programming languages are also just sugar?
One of the things I like about arrow function is that, you don't need to fill your code with the
functionkeyword, reducing the amount of noise and clutter. I really enjoy those kinds of things, where you don't need to write unnecesary keywords. Take Java for example, a big percentage of the code is justpublic,private,final,static... I don't enjoy that, it's a mess (but they have a place and I can see the value of them).And although I would not like this change to be implementet, I get your point :P
Let's hope it does not go that way, at least not excesively 🤞
Of course, that's what I like about this types of posts, they make us talk about this things and respectfully debate them
I will be much more productive if below are available:
JavaScript
stack,queue,heap/priority_queue,trie, etc from c++/java/pythonbinary_search,upper_bound,lower_bound, etc from c++/java/python.forEachis slow most casesNode.js
function main()if given, with command lineargsto itGreat suggestions, man. Having an inbuilt algorithm data structure will be fantastic.
Even in pure functional languages like Haskell, there are things like classes. Sometimes classes even enable more elegant functional designs. Sure people abuse OO horribly, but removing classes from the language entirely is too dogmatic.
Only if you did this, almost every site would break.
No you can't, not when private data has to be encapsulated into a struct like concept, not unless you're willing to sacrifice a great deal of performance and memory.
I think you're being too dogmatic.
Rename
XMLHttpRequestwithXMLHTTPRequest.Now that you mention it, I never realized how much I wanted this syntax until now.
I cringe reading this. You want to remove mostly optional stuff to make JS more like other language. My guess is you don't want to use JS and really want Python support in browsers.
if I had a magic wand I would make the bugs and errors in javacsript more informative so that we knew how to fix them without spending hours and days even :)
Make it never happen in the first place :P.
Ref: destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
I know XD
Thanks for your opinion, man!
I agree with you @lukeshiru !
I would add something like the extension methods found in C#
Just a question: Why
from ... import? Is there any benefit?Remove classes no one needs them. JS is anyway the most object oriented language even without them.
I am also personally not a fan of classes.
I would like to remove all those things which are repetative bevause in javascript there is more than one way to perform a single thing and I hate that most
You're removing a lot of stuff that makes JS a joy to work with
I agree, some of them where a bit extreme.
I also agree that some of the things like the null bug and such are a pain in the arse. But I don't think we should remove classes or force arrow function to only accept one argument. I like the freedom JS gives you, though that's also a bad thing about it :P
You might not like classes, but they have a place and can be really usefull. Not eveyone likes going all functional, to that peple I say, it's okay to be wrong xD joking, I do enjoy both
Strictly speaking, JS still doesn't have classes. It's just sugar to make it look like it does. Unnecessary really
Your example doesn't require any encapsulation, the only private data is shared by all objects; and that would definitely be one good usecase of classes.