> I feel like the class abstraction in ES2015 is mostly a mask that doesn't do people any favors
I agree completely.
When I first read the ES2015 draft, I was excited to see the class syntax. I assumed that it meant that JS was getting "traditional" inheritance, and it seems like a lot of others did too. That illusion was shattered shortly after beginning to use it.
Now, instead of thinking "Hey, these weird objects that I barely understand how I created don't behave as I expect! Javascript is different.", I think a lot of less experienced developers end up thinking "Hey, these objects don't behave as I expect. Javascript sucks."
I agree completely.
When I first read the ES2015 draft, I was excited to see the class syntax. I assumed that it meant that JS was getting "traditional" inheritance, and it seems like a lot of others did too. That illusion was shattered shortly after beginning to use it.
Now, instead of thinking "Hey, these weird objects that I barely understand how I created don't behave as I expect! Javascript is different.", I think a lot of less experienced developers end up thinking "Hey, these objects don't behave as I expect. Javascript sucks."