Flow: remove disinformation from flow.org
remove/change following statement from flow.org
Flow is designed to understand idiomatic JavaScript. It understands common JavaScript patterns and many of the weird things we JavaScript developers love to do.
Reason: since there is no official response about issue #396 , and the sentiment is that there is no plan to support the feature. The issue is from "Apr 17, 2015" is a deal breaker for many using this pattern.
hrgdavor
All 4 comments
I don't see a problem with this quote. Flow indeed supports many, but not all of the existing patterns. That said, the way of achieving https://github.com/facebook/flow/issues/396 is rather simple: you can put all the declarations your need alongside your code and edit them the way you want.
vkurchatkin
on 10 Sep 2017
@vkurchatkin I added this ticket just to confirm if there is intention to ever implement #396. It would be nice if you could mark #396 as "wont-fix" so those that are interestd know it.
Workarround you mentioned is pretty vague and sounds like maintenance nightmare. Sorry for aggressive ticket title, I just wanted to know if I should hope for a fix.
I was very excited about flow, and tried it on some sample code. Dissapoited that a such a common and useful pattern is being ignored, it is just not worth the hassle.
I turned notifications for #396 hoping that in few years you might reconsider and someone implements it. :( :( :(
hrgdavor
on 10 Sep 2017
It would be nice if you could mark #396 as "wont-fix" so those that are interestd know it.
I don't have authority to do so. /cc @calebmer
vkurchatkin
on 10 Sep 2017
A huge :+1: here — while I'm relatively ambivalent on #396 (Facebook's team can direct the project as they see fit, of course! Their use-cases may not align with the rest of ours', and that's totally fine), this is a whole different matter.
It is genuinely a huge misrepresentation to tell JavaScript developers that Flow is “built to work around common JavaScript idioms”, and then to not support the single most common JavaScript idiom. Various flavours of extension or monkey-patching are more common than IIFEs, more common than other applications of prototypal inheritance, more common than literally anything — except maybe Promises nowadays, heh.
Seems like a trivial decision to me, at least from the outside: Remove the problematic claims from the homepage, be clear about your direction, and let's all work together not to waste one another's time. ☺️
ELLIOTTCABLE
on 25 Sep 2017
Related issues
jamiebuilds
·
3Comments
iamchenxin
·
3Comments
funtaps
·
3Comments
ctrlplusb
·
3Comments
davidpelaez
·
3Comments
Most helpful comment
A huge :+1: here — while I'm relatively ambivalent on #396 (Facebook's team can direct the project as they see fit, of course! Their use-cases may not align with the rest of ours', and that's totally fine), this is a whole different matter.
It is genuinely a huge misrepresentation to tell JavaScript developers that Flow is “built to work around common JavaScript idioms”, and then to not support the single most common JavaScript idiom. Various flavours of extension or monkey-patching are more common than IIFEs, more common than other applications of prototypal inheritance, more common than literally anything — except maybe Promises nowadays, heh.
Seems like a trivial decision to me, at least from the outside: Remove the problematic claims from the homepage, be clear about your direction, and let's all work together not to waste one another's time. ☺️