Are the opening words, "The horror... the horror"?
A book series on JavaScript
31–40 of 111 posts
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#32I can highly recommend these books. They're one of the only books that do a real deep-dive into the language. I often have to interview people for javascript jobs. It's astonishing how few of them actually get how the `this` keyword, closures, prototypes etc work. So the title of the series may be arrogant, but not wrong.
[deleted]
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#33I can highly recommend these books. They're one of the only books that do a real deep-dive into the language. I often have to interview people for javascript jobs. It's astonishing how few of them actually get how the `this` keyword, closures, prototypes etc work. So the title of the series may be arrogant, but not wrong.
I fully agree, those books are awesome if you want to truly understand JS. I would, however, not say that understanding JS will help you become a better programmer and the time invested in fully understanding JS might be better invested somewhere else.
Some parts of "understanding JS" is just understanding a (insert your swearword) designed language, unfortunately. You might just not fully understand those parts and call them the bad parts. I can't stand not understanding, though.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#34I can highly recommend these books. They're one of the only books that do a real deep-dive into the language. I often have to interview people for javascript jobs. It's astonishing how few of them actually get how the `this` keyword, closures, prototypes etc work. So the title of the series may be arrogant, but not wrong.
This is too true. I've had a software engineer complain to me at how unfair his last interview was because they asked "esoteric javascript" questions in a front-end javascript development position. I asked him what questions he found tricky and a lot of them are really simple javascript 'things' (scopes, closure, iife, etc) that would come up sooner or later when you're working with the language
I think there is still a lingering mentality that you don't have to be an expert with JS to do front end work, and that's just not the case anymore.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is too true. I've had a software engineer complain to me at how unfair his last interview was because they asked "esoteric javascript" questions in a front-end javascript development position. I asked him what questions he found tricky and a lot of them are really simple javascript 'things' (scopes, closure, iife, etc) that would come up sooner or later when you're working with the language
I think there is still a lingering mentality that you don't have to be an expert with JS to do front end work, and that's just not the case anymore.
People treat js as a toy language then get upset when people use it to build actual applications.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#36From what I read, the author uses double quotes for string literals, "some string". Most of the style guides and linters recommend using single quotes, any idea on the advantage of each?
JQuery uses double quotes in their style guide. That might be where it comes from.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#37From what I read, the author uses double quotes for string literals, "some string". Most of the style guides and linters recommend using single quotes, any idea on the advantage of each?
To me, visually, I pick up "this is a string" faster with the double quotes.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#38I wouldn't normally do this, but since his books have popped up on here at this exact moment.. Kyle's teaching some short JS classes in London this coming week if you wanna come: https://ti.to/cooperpress/kyle-simpson-quick-workshops/ (disclosure: I'm the organiser)
I was at one of his classes in the Netherlands this week. I would definitely recommend it.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#39From what I read, the author uses double quotes for string literals, "some string". Most of the style guides and linters recommend using single quotes, any idea on the advantage of each?
I prefer double quotes to single quotes to strings: When you write C and C++ a single quote generates a character 8 byte literal. A double quote is a string an array of characters.
8 bit.
Re: A book series on JavaScript
#40I can highly recommend these books. They're one of the only books that do a real deep-dive into the language. I often have to interview people for javascript jobs. It's astonishing how few of them actually get how the `this` keyword, closures, prototypes etc work. So the title of the series may be arrogant, but not wrong.
I fully agree, those books are awesome if you want to truly understand JS. I would, however, not say that understanding JS will help you become a better programmer and the time invested in fully understanding JS might be better invested somewhere else. Some parts of "understanding JS" is just understanding a (insert your swearword) designed language, unfortunately. You might just not fully understand those parts and…
That's why I would recommend to read also "JavaScript: The Good Parts" (book, 2008) by Douglas Crockford. It covers (what is nowadays known as Javascript 1.5) and highlights the good parts of the language.