191–200 of 342 posts
Consider this code and the range of comments on it while doing (or undergoing) your next non-trivial code review.
(For one thing, it reminds me that a great value of adopting comprehensive code standards is that it resolves these kinds arguments, letting teams get on with the important stuff.)
Barely readable but I think there's a lot of optimization going on here... I don't think that optimization is done correctly but that is why it's hard to read.
It's also incredibly readable; I'm puzzled as to what the bar for "readability" is if this doesn't meet it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does seem strange if you think of it as “return the last evaluated thing from the function.” But that’s not the semantic; the semantic is “everything is an expression and expressions evaluate to a value.” Removing this behavior would make these languages less consistent. (And yes, in both Ruby and Rust not literally everything is an expression, but almost everything is.)
I agree that because of common uses of things like match in Rust it makes it consistent to also do it for functions. I don't agree that the reason why it's consistent is because a function body is an expression (though of course you have more expertise than me on this one -- and Rust does actually treat scopes much more strictly than most other languages so you could argue every scope has the smell of a function call…
> A function consists of a block, along with a name and a set of parameters.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/expressions/block-expr.h...
> Blocks are always value expressions and evaluate the last expression in value expression context.
This is neat (how the up/downvote onclick handler sends the info to the server). new Image().src = el.href; Where href looks like this: vote?id=xxxxxxxx&how=up&auth=yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy&goto=item%3Fid%3Dzzzzzzzz#wwwwwwww
Image makes the HTTP request without appending the Image to the DOM? TIL
There are some polarized opinions in this thread. Someone wrote That might be one of the most readable pieces of code that I've ever read. Apparently it improves readability immensely to rename 'forEach' to 'aeach'. To be honest the code is not very readable, but it is very simple and self contained. It would be very easy to dive into to fix a bug because there are no external dependencies or frameworks you have to u…
Seriously though... do you guys declare variables with var or let? I thought let was the new standard for scoping reasons. I'm not trying to start a holy war, I'm just a junior looking to learn.
var is pretty much just for legacy codes. Yes, it has unique behaviors, but better stick to the new keywords, can prevent some headaches.
function hidestory (ev, el, id) { for (var i=0; i That 3 there is the problem with “simple” JS. It’s tightly coupled to the HTML but they live in completely different places. On a side note this 3 should be at least assigned to a variable with a meaningful name.
Except there isn't any problem here whatsoever. Yes, it's coupled, but it doesn't matter. No, this kind of code doesn't scale. It doesn't have to . The time you spent writing this comment was longer than what it took writing this code. Considering what kind of site this is, that code may work indefinitely. Or, if necessary, someone from the future will need to change that 3 to a 4 at some point. In terms of total cos…
He/she could have put much of the function in the top under the $() to make a super mini jquery. That's close to what I use with Vue. It's made even easier to write considering I almost never find a need for jquery's default behaviour of running its methods on multiple nodes. 99% of the time in my projects I just need to do something with one node.
I’ve replaced jQuery on several projects with $ = querySelector, $$ = querySelectorAll (wrapped in Array.from if you need to support IE11 so you can use all of the new array methods which their NodeList implementation didn’t get until Edge), classList and fetch. Beyond the code size savings, I find the newer standard methods are generally easier to understand when scanning code.
Criticisms and bizarre fawning over beauty that a couple of people have made aside, the one thing that bugs me the most is the inconsistent usage of ;