In Felix\'s Node.js Style Guide it says:
Do not extend the prototypes of any objects, especially native ones. There is a special place in hell waiting
No, prototypes are not bad. Quite the opposite, JavaScript is a prototypal language and prototypes are how you are supposed to extend objects.
The quote is against extending Object.prototype
specifically. Not "An object's prototype". Everything in JavaScript inherits from Object
, so messing with its prototype effects everything. It breaks for(var n in obj){
loops and is just annoying.
That's the only thing against prototypes -- they show up in for-in loops. Other than that, they are, BY FAR, the best performing way to extend objects in JS.
As for why -- Adding objects in the constructor, say:
function myClass(){
this.someMethod = function(){ ... }
}
means you will have a seperate function for every instance of the class. Doing it via a prototype:
myClass.prototype.someMethod = function(){ ... }
means there will only ever be one copy of that function. Much more memory efficient, and allows for hot-editing of the language. Let's say you want to edit String.prototype, for instance:
String.prototype.trim = function(){ ... }
If you just added that to the constructor somehow, existing strings would not have the .trim()
method, so the code: navigator.userAgent.trim()
would not work since navigator.userAgent
was defined before you added your trim()
method.
And that article is just Tim being anal and paranoid. Ignore it :) As long as you don't forget to type new myClass()
instead of just myClass()
, you won't have any issues.