Yes, although I wouldn't use the first.
The reason the first one works is because this in a function is set to whatever came before the dot operator. That is
Foo.testIt()
^^^ <- this will be Foo
This roundabout way is confusing in a sense that you expect this to be an instance, but there's no instance here.
In conclusion, the two are almost always equivalent, but I would still use Foo over this.
Yes, both versions refer to the static field inside a static method. Inside a static method this refers to the current object the method is being invoked on which will be the class.
Be careful though if you assign the static method to a different variable, this will no longer refer to the class (since the method will not be invoked on the class). The class named access will work regardless of how the method is called.
class Foo {
private static temp: Number = 1;
public static testIt() {
console.log(this.temp)
console.log(Foo.temp)
}
}
Foo.testIt(); // Outputs 1, 1
let m = Foo.testIt;
m(); // Outputs undefined, 1
Both way are correct
Foo.testIt() this will refer to FooFoo (lexical scope) and try to update his property temp to zero this way this point to another object rather than Foo
Foo.testIt.call({}); => undefined , zero
TypeScript is a superset to verify if your code types are logically consistent (type checking), it does not verify if your code is good practice or what it does. So it will compile as this code type checking is valid.
So what does this code do?
Foo.temp means the variable in the Foo Class
this.temp means the variable in the instance of the Foo Class.
