Pushing something onto an array isn't changing the array? It's not changing the reference to the array, but from a style standpoint it doesn't make sense.

And if you're declaring a const within the scope of a function, it's still allocating memory when it enters the scope and disposing it when it leaves the scope, same as a variable. There's no performance benefit to do this.

Something like const CONSTANT_VALUE = "This never changes" has a performance benefit and is actually how other languages use constants. The value will always be the same, the compiler understands this and can optimize accordingly. If you're declaring an iterator or the result of calling a webservice to be const it'll be a different value every time it runs that code, so it's not something a compiler can optimize. In style terms, it's a value that's different every time you get to that line of code, so why would you want to call it constant?

You're comment indicates the FE dev obsession with always using const stems from a misunderstanding of how computers work. But of course many religious beliefs originate from a misunderstanding of the world. Whatever man, I just make it a const to make the linter happy, because it's dumb FE bullshit LOL.

semicolons? quotes? use a formatter and don't think about it. I think js world has basically done this already.

It's nice when a codebase has sane formatter conventions. I can't say that my workplace does, tho…

const arrow over named function? gets rid of all the legacy behaviors and apis. no arguments, consistent this, and no hoisting or accidental reassignment. the 2 places you should ever use named fn are generator or if you actually need `this

How is having arguments and this an issue? If one doesn't need them, then it can be just left unused. I really don't get this argument. It makes everything visually a variable. I see no benefit to this convention and actively despise it.

Stylistically, you're changing the array when you add something to it. Javascript is a janky language in the best of times, but FE devs like to artificially introduce additional unnecessary complexities on top of the jank.

const is simpler. why would I declare an array as let if I’m not reassigning?

Why would you declare a const that's going to have different data every time to function is called?

Now I'm thinking it's a form of gatekeeping. Just an excuse for FE devs to throw out terms like "immutable" to make it sound like they know what they're taking about. Y'all need to constantly sound like you know what you're talking about when dealing with users, pretending weird stylistic choices have real technical reasons for them. But the BE devs know what you're saying is complete bullshit LOL.