Exploring the inner workings of TypeScript from a more theoretical perspective.
Referencing this particular discussion and drawing from personal experiences, it appears that there are two distinct methods for handling constructor parameter properties when extending a class.
Approach 1: Passing existing fields
class Base {
constructor(public field: string) {}
}
class Derived extends Base {
constructor(field: string) {
super(field);
}
}
Approach 2: Redeclaring existing fields
class Base {
constructor(public field: string) {}
}
class Derived extends Base {
constructor(public field: string) {
super(field);
}
}
According to the insights provided in the aforementioned question and answer, there are constraints on how the field can be redeclared, which I have come to understand.
Prompting the following inquiries:
- Does the second method result in defining two separate fields within the class, with one overshadowed by the other? Will
this.fieldandsuper.fieldreference different attributes of the class? - In a similar vein to the previous question, does the second approach yield contrasting outcomes when dealing with methods specified in the
BaseandDerivedclasses?
Fundamentally, the inquiry stands as follows: Do these approaches exhibit identical functionality, or do they diverge in certain exceptional scenarios?
Based on personal encounters, both methods seem to achieve equivalent results.
I lean towards the first approach personally, as it gives me a sense of security knowing that "nothing can go awry," without any hidden pitfalls. However, delving deeper into this subject would aid me in avoiding basing my programming decisions solely on vague instincts.
Your input is greatly appreciated. Thank you.