I won’t disagree that JavaScript isn’t multi-paradigm and you
can write in a functional style, but you have to look at where the ergonomics are:
• dot, `.`, syntax on objects vs. composition/pipe operators
• no autocurry
• no ADTs or basic pattern matching
• has null + undefined but no Maybe/Option (there is null coalescing and null chaining, but it’s easy to accidentally skip)
• const can still mutate the on the object, freeze incurs a massive performance cost
• no tail-call optimization outside Safari despite being in the ECMA2015 spec
• `class` keyword existed and private methods and values now, FP is pretty anti-encapsulation
• no immutable data structures in the stdlib
• no way to prevent side effects (/* __PURE__ */ in code generation is a hack)
Can you get benefits from avoiding state/mutation and choosing composition over inheritance? Sure, but it’s nothing like being in a language where these aren’t something you can do or the default, but the only way to write code and having the tool to express it.
• dot, `.`, syntax on objects vs. composition/pipe operators
• no autocurry
• no ADTs or basic pattern matching
• has null + undefined but no Maybe/Option (there is null coalescing and null chaining, but it’s easy to accidentally skip)
• const can still mutate the on the object, freeze incurs a massive performance cost
• no tail-call optimization outside Safari despite being in the ECMA2015 spec
• `class` keyword existed and private methods and values now, FP is pretty anti-encapsulation
• no immutable data structures in the stdlib
• no way to prevent side effects (/* __PURE__ */ in code generation is a hack)
Can you get benefits from avoiding state/mutation and choosing composition over inheritance? Sure, but it’s nothing like being in a language where these aren’t something you can do or the default, but the only way to write code and having the tool to express it.