我解决这个问题的方法，这是另一个选择(如果你有jQuery可用)，是在一个老式的对象中定义字段，然后用该对象扩展类。我也不想在构造函数中添加赋值，这似乎是一个整洁的解决方案。

function MyClassFields(){
    this.createdAt = new Date();
}

MyClassFields.prototype = {
    id : '',
    type : '',
    title : '',
    createdAt : null,
};

class MyClass {
    constructor() {
        $.extend(this,new MyClassFields());
    }
};

——根据Bergi的评论更新。

没有JQuery版本:

class SavedSearch  {
    constructor() {
        Object.assign(this,{
            id : '',
            type : '',
            title : '',
            createdAt: new Date(),
        });

    }
}

你仍然会得到“胖”构造函数，但至少它都在一个类中，并在一次命中赋值。

编辑# 2: 我现在已经走了一圈，现在在构造函数中赋值，例如。

class SavedSearch  {
    constructor() {
        this.id = '';
        this.type = '';
        this.title = '';
        this.createdAt = new Date();
    }
}

为什么?真的很简单，使用上面的加上一些JSdoc注释，PHPStorm就能够在属性上执行代码补全。在一次命中分配所有的变量是很好的，但无法编码完成属性，在我看来，不值得(几乎肯定是微乎其微的)性能收益。

这是一个有点黑客的组合静态和得到工作为我

class ConstantThingy{
        static get NO_REENTER__INIT() {
            if(ConstantThingy._NO_REENTER__INIT== null){
                ConstantThingy._NO_REENTER__INIT = new ConstantThingy(false,true);
            }
            return ConstantThingy._NO_REENTER__INIT;
        }
}

在其他地方使用

var conf = ConstantThingy.NO_REENTER__INIT;
if(conf.init)...

那老派的方法呢?

class MyClass {
     constructor(count){ 
          this.countVar = 1 + count;
     }
}
MyClass.prototype.foo = "foo";
MyClass.prototype.countVar = 0;

// ... 

var o1 = new MyClass(2); o2 = new MyClass(3);
o1.foo = "newFoo";

console.log( o1.foo,o2.foo);
console.log( o1.countVar,o2.countVar);

在构造函数中，你只提到那些需要计算的变量。 我喜欢这个特性的原型继承——它可以帮助节省大量内存(以防有很多从未分配的变量)。

由于您的问题主要是风格上的(不想用一堆声明填充构造函数)，因此也可以从风格上解决。

The way I view it, many class based languages have the constructor be a function named after the class name itself. Stylistically we could use that that to make an ES6 class that stylistically still makes sense but does not group the typical actions taking place in the constructor with all the property declarations we're doing. We simply use the actual JS constructor as the "declaration area", then make a class named function that we otherwise treat as the "other constructor stuff" area, calling it at the end of the true constructor.

"use strict";

class MyClass
{
    // only declare your properties and then call this.ClassName(); from here
    constructor(){
        this.prop1 = 'blah 1';
        this.prop2 = 'blah 2';
        this.prop3 = 'blah 3';
        this.MyClass();
    }

    // all sorts of other "constructor" stuff, no longer jumbled with declarations
    MyClass() {
        doWhatever();
    }
}

在构造新实例时，两者都将被调用。

有点像有两个构造函数，你可以把声明和其他你想要执行的构造函数动作分开，并且在风格上让它不太难以理解这是在发生什么。

我发现当处理大量声明和/或大量需要在实例化时发生的操作并希望保持这两种思想彼此不同时，使用这种风格很好。

NOTE: I very purposefully do not use the typical idiomatic ideas of "initializing" (like an init() or initialize() method) because those are often used differently. There is a sort of presumed difference between the idea of constructing and initializing. Working with constructors people know that they're called automatically as part of instantiation. Seeing an init method many people are going to assume without a second glance that they need to be doing something along the form of var mc = MyClass(); mc.init();, because that's how you typically initialize. I'm not trying to add an initialization process for the user of the class, I'm trying to add to the construction process of the class itself.

While some people may do a double-take for a moment, that's actually the bit of the point: it communicates to them that the intent is part of construction, even if that makes them do a bit of a double take and go "that's not how ES6 constructors work" and take a second looking at the actual constructor to go "oh, they call it at the bottom, I see", that's far better than NOT communicating that intent (or incorrectly communicating it) and probably getting a lot of people using it wrong, trying to initialize it from the outside and junk. That's very much intentional to the pattern I suggest.

对于那些不想遵循这种模式的人来说，完全相反的方法也可以奏效。在开始时将声明传递给另一个函数。也许可以命名为“properties”或“publicProperties”之类的。然后把剩下的东西放在普通构造函数中。

"use strict";

class MyClass
{
    properties() {
        this.prop1 = 'blah 1';
        this.prop2 = 'blah 2';
        this.prop3 = 'blah 3';
    }

    constructor() {
        this.properties();
        doWhatever();
    }
}

请注意，第二种方法可能看起来更干净，但它也有一个固有的问题，即当使用该方法的类扩展另一个类时，属性会被覆盖。为了避免这种情况，您必须为属性提供更唯一的名称。我的第一个方法没有这个问题，因为它的伪构造函数的一半是以类唯一命名的。

你可以在构造函数中声明变量。

class Foo {
    constructor() {
        var name = "foo"
        this.method = function() {
            return name
        }
    }
}

var foo = new Foo()

foo.method()

[长线程，不确定它是否已经列为一个选项…]。 仅用于常量的一个简单替代方法是在类外部定义const。 除非附带getter，否则只能从模块本身访问。 这样原型就不会被乱扔，你就能得到const。

// will be accessible only from the module itself
const MY_CONST = 'string'; 
class MyClass {

    // optional, if external access is desired
    static get MY_CONST(){return MY_CONST;}

    // access example
    static someMethod(){
        console.log(MY_CONST);
    }
}