Did the outcome align with your expectations? If so, then it can be considered a suitable approach, although the definition of "correct" may vary in this context.
From my observation, running the code in the console appears to achieve its intended functionality. However, without a clear understanding of the specific domain being represented, such as breaking down Ducks into fundamental components, I cannot provide further insights on your code.
If you opt for this method, I would recommend utilizing a params object instead of altering the constructor signature directly through AnimalsWithWings. This ensures that the order of additional parameters is not reliant on the sequence in which mixins were applied, thereby avoiding unexpected outcomes. It's best to minimize surprises in coding practices.
const AnimalsWithWings = superclass => class extends superclass {
// Each instance receives the same `params` object.
// Properties are assigned based on what is provided in the `params`.
constructor(params) {
super(params);
Object.assign(this, { Feathers: params.Feathers });
}
}
In addition, I personally suggest naming them WithDiving and WithWings for consistency and clarity, emphasizing their nature as modifiers rather than standalone base classes.
While your implementation results in each Duck inheriting a prototype chain four levels deep, it may not pose a performance issue initially. Should optimization become necessary, consider streamlining the mixin process by flattening the prototypes or creating a utility function.
Furthermore, enabling the use of super.method() within methods raises debate regarding its suitability in a mixin. It introduces implicit dependencies between mixins, potentially leading to unforeseen issues.
There are myriad alternative approaches to implementing mixins:
- Flattening prototypes using a utility function and constructing a base class from which to extend.
- Bypassing Classes entirely by directly manipulating prototype objects with
Object.create().
- Constructing a Duck prototype through repeated calls to
Object.create() instead of extending base classes iteratively.
- Utilizing helper Controller Classes to manage additional behaviors instead of integrating them directly into the base.
- Operating solely with plain objects containing data and passing them to functions that expect specific properties, akin to "duck typing."
- And many other possible methods that involve adding sets of behaviors to a foundational entity.