Make Value objects extend/inherit the superclass "ValueObject"

[EncodedLua (Juniper)]

It would make identifying if an object is a IntValue, Color3Value, CFrameValue, etc. easier if all of the value objects had 1 superclass. Then you would be able to do this:

for i, v in pairs(part:GetChildren()) do
    if v:IsA("ValueObject") then
       v:Destroy()
    end
end

[filiptibell]

This has been posted before:

Condense all value objects into one generic ValueObject

The downsides to creating a new object for each data type are that: [ul] [li]You have to create a new object every time you create a DataType (or should at least)[/li] [li]Unable to use objects to store values for data types not represented with value objects (i.e. Vector2, UDim2, etc)[/li] [li]Advanced Objects is spammed with lots of value objects since there are so many data types[/li] [li]API bloat[/li] [li]No way to check if something is a value object with :IsA(“ValueObject”) since al…

It’s not the main subject, but if you read through the thread EchoReaper suggests the same thing:

@EchoReaper

…should all inherit from a superclass “ValueObjects” (better name pls) so that a value object can be discerned with :IsA(“ValueObjects”)

[EncodedLua (Juniper)]

Oh wow, exact same class name too lol

[Autterfly]

The solution .ClassName:match'Value' always works but yes the base class would be an improvement.