"without the helper, you must repetitive times write:
"Name.prototype""

still looks better, and the additional context is worth it IMO, plus
editors are good
at dealing with repetitive tasks, at least half the code I "write" is
not typed, I think the
same goes lots of devs

On Nov 5, 8:02 pm, Jake Verbaten <[email protected]> wrote:
> function Name() {}
>
> extend(Name.prototype, {
>     ...
>
> })
>
> Tada. No more typing.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Fredrik O <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Den måndagen den 5:e november 2012 kl. 10:01:58 UTC+1 skrev greelgorke:
>
> >> 3. I guess "helpful" is a matter of flavor and familiarity. i don't see
> >> the need to type down "classes" in js, may be thats the point.
> >> 3.1 a helper in a sense of DRY have to reduce amount of code. now instead
> >> of typing down the prototype, constructor etc, you have to pass objects,
> >> that's just anouther side of the same verbosity and it changes the
> >> semantics here a bit ("i use classical mindset now").
>
> > It reduces the amount of code you must type down:
>
> > var Name = helper({
> >   method1: function() {
> >   },
> >   method2: function() {
> >   },
> >   //..
> > });
>
> > vs
>
> > function Name() {
> > }
> > Name.prototype.method1 = function() {
> > };
> > Name.prototype.method2 = function() {
> > };
> > //...
> > Without the helper, you must repetitive times write: "Name.prototype".
> > You can of course assign it in the function using this, but it is bad
> > practice and has poor performance. And as soon you start to use any helper
> > variable and function, do you use code you argue against.
>
> > 3.2 your gist: to change the prototype of the Derived2 class you have to
> >> change lines
> >> 47: call to "base" constructor
> >> 51: call to getText from "base" proto, simulating super.getText
> >> 57: Change property baseClass
>
> >> to change prototype at runtime you have to do even more, like replacing
> >> the getText property with a new function with the call to the new
> >> prototype. etc.
>
> > And in which way can you skip this in normal prototype inheritance?
>
> > 4. This is really a topic with potential to produce a next world war.
> >> there are so many definitions of OO and most of them are near by a dogma.
> >> OO is about Objects, objects encapsulate and hide internal data/state and
> >> offer public API to manipulate this data. Allan Key said in 2003:
> >>  "*OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and
> >> hiding of state-process, and extreme 
> >> LateBinding<http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?LateBinding> of
> >> all things.*"
> >> No word of classes anymore. Classes are state of the art to define Types
> >> in OO, but its not the only way to do that. Inheritance is a preferred way
> >> to share and reuse Code in OO, but it's not the only way, "Favor
> >> Composition over Inheritance" is one of OO-Design Principles, because it's
> >> introduces looser coupling than the coupling offered by classical
> >> inheritance.
>
> > I am not a big fan of inheritance nor OO, but sure can it be great, same
> > as multiple inheritance.
>
> > --
> > Job Board:http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> > Posting guidelines:
> >https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en

-- 
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines: 
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en

Reply via email to