[doc issue] JavaScript Coding Guidelines #169
Labels
follow-up-with/po
Clarification with product owner needed.
in-discussion
This item is being discussed internally
Issue description
I’m wondering why the official guidelines still promote patterns from the 80s, where development was done in raw text editors rather than in modern IDEs. In modern IDEs, type inference is actually possible—if not always accurate—whereas the old methods often lead to cluttered codebases.
There are numerous articles online pointing out the same issues, emphasizing that maintaining a clear codebase is preferable to enduring rare but confusing error messages. These errors can actually teach us to revise our code to fix critical issues.
When considering the Wikipedia article, there are more points against the old practices (12 cons) than benefits (10 pros). By simply following these numbers, you could argue that we are losing ground by introducing boilerplate code that leads to unnatural coding practices. Constantly revising code to comply with outdated rules—rules that the team has suggested moving beyond—only contributes to unnecessary clutter.
It would be beneficial for future developers to prevent such cluttering and improve code readability. Furthermore, I heard that you are migrating to TypeScript, so that’s kind of the direction it’s going anyway.
https://community.sap.com/t5/technology-blogs-by-sap/why-the-hungarian-notation-should-not-be-used-for-modern-sapui5-development/ba-p/13483943
Feedback Type (Optional)
None
Page Title on SAP Help Portal (prefilled)
No response
Page URL on SAP Help Portal (prefilled)
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: