New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Guide section 5.1 on object destructuring may lead to anti-pattern #2619
Comments
I’m not sure this is an antipattern, given the language features available to us. Just because there’s repetition doesn’t automatically mean it’s bad - it would be nice to reduce it, but in your last example, user is repeated many many times. The repetition of de and re structuring is imo much better than the repetition of the object. |
I agree with "Just because there’s repetition doesn’t automatically mean it’s bad". This issue is really to raise this discussion of whether or not this is an antipattern (should be marked with "question" label?). So thanks for your input! I disagree on your assessment on the two types of repetition though. Mostly because the |
This issue is realted to guide section 5.1 Use object destructuring when accessing and using multiple properties of an object
Although the section rationale and examples are very clear and logical, IMO when followed unrestrictedly (or naively) it may lead to an anti-pattern with the bad features this very section is trying to avoid in the first place (repetitive code, opportunities for mistakes and unnecessary extra temporary references).
Apparently the anti-pattern arises more clearly when there is a combination of these conditions:
Here's an example to illustrate:
If the package owners agree with the problem, I believe we should be able to add some content to warn about this anti-pattern and how to avoid it.
Thanks in advance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: