Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ben Bacarisse Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Overriding function and adding a bit Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 20:55:27 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 50 Message-ID: <878tm0edlc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> References: <5178377.MhkbZ0Pkbq@PointedEars.de> <20479369.6Emhk5qWAg@PointedEars.de> <10849548.O9o76ZdvQC@PointedEars.de> <05f57f29-8dd8-4829-9952-7ffd20411fb5@googlegroups.com> <877f1kg4mz.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <579d836f-190f-488b-859a-2d1320aa8242@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="bf872e1a0ce0b20e2fe0b3253c5903fc"; logging-data="17600"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19WbAcm2X9fAAO0grtUuQv8F/U2xD59Ht4=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:gSybY5tBgqJE8Mt8Bvar+CvfxWw= sha1:eyMl9ZbgnQcatRQCYVUhEsERRXM= X-BSB-Auth: 1.bac6a372e2f2cfb532dc.20170513205527BST.878tm0edlc.fsf@bsb.me.uk Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:33307 Cezary Tomczyk writes: > On 13/05/2017 17:30, Julio Di Egidio wrote: >> On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 5:26:01 PM UTC+2, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> Julio Di Egidio writes: >>> >>>> On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 3:39:44 PM UTC+2, John G Harris wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 12 May 2017 17:28:02 -0700 (PDT), Julio Di Egidio >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> to suggest OO patterns to architect JS code is simple >>>>>> an utter mistake, that you propose so or that some vendors now are >>>>>> proposing so... >>>>> >>>>> Are you saying ECMAScript programs can't or shouldn't implement an OO >>>>> design? If so, how do you justify your belief? >>>> >>>> You may have beliefs, I am a software professional and that (what I said, >>>> not how you rephrase it) is just the A in the ABC of JavaScript. >>> >>> ECMAScript uses prototype-based inheritance rather than class-based >>> inheritance but that does not mean it is not and object-oriented >>> language not that one should not write object-oriented programs using >>> it. >> >> Yes it does: *at least* read Crockford before you open your mouth again, >> you *apparently* don't know what you are talking about. > > I think you are judging people too fast. I suggest to meet someone a > bit more closely before write such a statement. I doubt he means it. He often flies off the handle. Anyway, I've read Crockford and he also describes JavaScript (that's the term he uses) as an object oriented language. There can be no reasonable doubt that ECMAScript is an object-oriented language (the language definition says so, as does Crockford -- Julio Di Egidio's preferred authority) but there *are* very significant differences between class-based and prototype-based inheritance (which Crockford discusses of course) which we could have a productive discussion about. If Julio Di Egidio would actually engage in the debate, we might find out what he was getting at with the remark that started this subthread. Oh well... that's Usenet. -- Ben.