People interested in functional programming — perhaps especially people tempted to a kind of zealotry on the subject (as I was a few years ago!).
Classes in TypeScript look a lot like classes in traditional “object-oriented” programming languages like Java and C♯. You can use them this way, to be sure (with all the qualifications about prototypal inheritance being very different from classical inheritance). It took me a bit over a year of writing TypeScript every day to realize that the fact that you can use them for OOP doesn’t mean you can’t use them for other things. Once I got over that mental bump, I started using them extensively for a functional programming style.
For example, when I wrote up my introduction to data constructors for sum types in ML-related languages using TypeScript, I used classes to model them. I even ended up preferring classes over a non-class based solution for the implementation after experimenting with alternatives! Likewise, the
Result types in the True Myth library Ben Makuh and I built a couple years ago use classes under the hood.
The big takeaway here is that functional programming isn’t about avoiding the
class keyword. It is instead about embracing composition of pure functions as a key mechanic for building up your program, with the many benefits that come from doing so. The point of embracing good ideas from functional programming — as from logic programming or object-oriented programming or any other idiom — is to let us build better software. The point is expressly not to become ideological or dogmatic about our tools. So: if a class is the best way to represent one of the data structures your function deals with, great! Likewise, if a class method is a useful way of providing a functional interface, great! Use the tools in your language to make nice API s which are easy to use correctly and hard (or even impossible!) to misuse. That’s the point.