ES6 Classes: General language/structure touch-up #28947
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
At this point in time, the good/bad controversies aren't so prevalent given it's now been 9 years since ES6 release. Many of the resources around criticising or analysing pros/cons of class syntax appear to be within a year or two of ES6 release, and before additional features were added, like private properties. This content has led to several doubts about whether it's worth learning class syntax and whether it's "bad and shouldn't be used", despite it now being somewhat commonplace.
Removed mixins - common pain point as it goes a lot deeper than necessary at this point
More relevant topics in that lesson as opposed to class syntax.
To match assignment structure
Less focus on "using classes might not be good" and more focus on how the underlying mechanics are still the same prototypal inheritance with different syntax.
MaoShizhong
requested review from
a team,
thatblindgeye and
bycdiaz
and removed request for
a team and
thatblindgeye
|
Original intention was to reduce external doc assignments and have more in-house content, but given the lesson's focus should mostly be on new syntax, that felt too close to just reproducing documentation. A less dramatic approach felt more effective here - we can always revisit if we notice new patterns of pain points in the community. |
Closed
3 tasks
Section goes out of scope for this TOP lesson.
Original wording could be misinterpreted to mean that Player.prototype actually is the same object as Person.prototype, instead of inheriting from it.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Because
It's not too uncommon that I find people in the community expressing frustration at the complexity of the documentation in the ES6 classes lesson, despite the intro saying there's not much extra to learn. The current verbiage has also led many to question if classes are "bad" and wonder if they shouldn't be used at all/shouldn't learn about them if they're "so controversial". This may have been more relevant around ES6 release but now they're far more common and with more features added since.
It would be beneficial to rephrase some of those parts of the lesson, while also rethinking some of the assignments to try and narrow the focus on "new syntax for concepts you already know about", with extra focus on "no need to dig too deep right now either".
This PR
Issue
Closes #28797
Closes #29061
Additional Information
Pull Request Requirements
location of change: brief description of changeformat, e.g.Intro to HTML and CSS lesson: Fix link textBecausesection summarizes the reason for this PRThis PRsection has a bullet point list describing the changes in this PRIssuesection