vuejs / rfcs

RFCs for substantial changes / feature additions to Vue core
4.86k stars 548 forks source link

Proposal for functional programming #211

Closed axetroy closed 3 years ago

axetroy commented 3 years ago

It's well known that the biggest difference between Vue and React is that one is functional programming and the other is object-oriented programming.

Object-oriented is always inseparable from objects (this)

So in Vue, we often write this.xxx

This is not friendly to IDE, and greatly increases the code size

this.addCount cannot be compressed, It will become It becomes a.addCount at most.

And there is no way to do tree-shake. Once a method is defined in methods, the bundler cannot remove it.

export default {
  methods: {
    a_method_never_use() {
      // this should be `tree-shake`, but not in this case
    }
  }
}

For a huge project, it is too wasteful to not compress it

So I propose to add a special tag for supporting functional programming

<script mode="esm">

</script>

object-oriented programming:

<template>
    <div>
        {{ count }}
        <button @click="addCount">add</button>
    </div>
</template>

<script>
export default {
    data() {
        return {
            count: 0
        };
    },
    methods: {
        addCount() {
            this.count++;
        }
    },
    created () {
        console.log('component created')
    },
    mounted () {
        console.log('component mounted')
    }
};
</script>

Functional programming:

<template>
    <div>
        {{ count }}
        <button @click="addCount">add</button>
    </div>
</template>

<script mode="esm">
import { reactive, useMounted, useCreated } from 'vue';

let count = reactive(0);

export function addCount() {
    count++;
}

useCreated((instance) => {
    console.log('component created');
})

useMounted((instance) => {
    console.log('component mounted');
});

export { count };
</script>

This is an immature proposal, just to provide a thought

robertmoura commented 3 years ago

Functional programming:

Check out #182. The setup block proposed by Evan You is pretty close to what you're looking for 😄

axetroy commented 3 years ago

@robertmoura Thanks for telling me that. I did not focus on this proposal.