Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: Object oriented programming
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 15:26:21 +0100
Organization: solani.org
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <p2tam8$jk8$1@solani.org>
References: <3c2333ff-00fe-4087-ab49-f52d0546b29b@googlegroups.com> <f535eff4-a2cd-40f9-aa54-5cf02864e2fa@googlegroups.com> <f2ed9b14-66d5-46be-ac65-a7f8cea1a46d@googlegroups.com> <f6m15dlj11m1v0av240825ofafor4824vp@4ax.com> <5d1ca5ad-55c3-43b5-b3d0-617e3150355e@googlegroups.com> <qma45ddo79n510n3hbnc8p1s74b2m475if@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: solani.org 1515335176 20104 eJwNyskBwCAIBMCWWBHEcjjc/ktIfvMYU4f32W6+jcaU0zoViYAlRKSquO3xRu/XUAZOg1d1gvr/Sl+TI8l4E7N6AoVsd/ZRmV/30MULsT7JEx9a (7 Jan 2018 14:26:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 14:26:16 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
Content-Language: de-DE
X-User-ID: eJwNx8kBwCAIBMCWXGARyzEc/Zdg5jdUh+c2pxuHc6TlE9WF3R0srFxpt4gMnBpnIAET3vkfDw5SEJQ=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZWFTojlnQ8G2P+Zh6qU1/Tlqgb8=
In-Reply-To: <qma45ddo79n510n3hbnc8p1s74b2m475if@4ax.com>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNybEBACEIBLCVBLkDxlGQ/Uf4L1IFm8JyI2gYTFWstrw7SD1KzEm7K55Zi9H55zNoxfX981y3pcw9vFaOthwiA1LM98J5YvxlQqXQ/ABiYB1G
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:34499

On 07.01.2018 at 15:13, John G Harris wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 23:54:16 -0800 (PST), "Michael Haufe (TNO)"
> <tno@thenewobjective.com> wrote:
> 
>> John G Harris wrote:
>>> "Michael Haufe (TNO)" wrote:
>>>
>>> Regarding this :
>>>
>>>   <snip>
>>>> I am aware of the arguments of prototypical vs classical OOP though [3] and both sides.
>>>   <snip>
>>>
>>> Note that in this paper :
>>>> [3] "Psychological Criticism of the Prototype-Based Object-Oriented Languages" <https://web.archive.org/web/20100316225046/http://www.helsinki.fi:80/~jppesone/papers/kandi.html>
>>>
>>> a prototypal language is defined as one where a new object can only be
>>> created by cloning another object. This is most definitely not
>>> ECMAScript.
>>
>> A distinction that doesn't make a difference. ECMAScript has a superset of that behavior being multi-paradigm:
>>
>> let newObject = Object.create(oldObject)
> 
> Eh? oldObject is the prototype object of newObject. 
> 
> newObject and oldObject have different prototype objects; newObject
> can't be a clone of oldObject.

You may prefer

  let newObject = Object.assign({}, oldObject);

-- 
Christoph M. Becker