101–110 of 383 posts
Every programming language has some weird stuff in it.
If you are writing code like that then you are the problem not the language.
Is this just for the clicks? Is this developer click bait?
Why are people wasting time on sites like this? Every programming language has some weird stuff in it. If you are writing code like that then you are the problem not the language. Is this just for the clicks? Is this developer click bait?
0.2 + 0.1 === 0.3 That's not really a JS problem, that's a floating point problem. Plenty of languages will have the same issue. +!![] "" - - "" (null - 0) + "0" Calling these things weird is fair enough but I can't help thinking this is code you'd never actually write outside of the context of a "Look how weird JS is!" post. It's like picking examples from the Annual Obfuscated C Contest to show how hard it is to un…
Some of them are stretched examples, others comes from other languages/constraints (floating point, octal, ...), but some other are legitimately weird and error prone: [1, 2, 3] + [4, 5, 6] // -> "1,2,34,5,6" [,,,].length // -> 3
"WAT $a .= "World!"; ?"
This covers most of the weirdness with primitive types, but then we have an oddly designed OO system on top of that: prototypes + `this` and constructors + classes bolted on.
In a language like Java you have objects and classes at the bottom of the language. How would you add maps to the language? Well, you create a Map class, implement put, get, has methods, etc.
Now imagine a language where you have functions and maps as your basic primitives, but you don't have classes and objects. How do you add objects and classes to the language? You can do something like this: objects are maps, information about their basic class is saved in 'prototype' property, constructor is a function that returns an object, etc. That's how JavaScript works. You can read about this in more details here https://exploringjs.com/impatient-js/ch_proto-chains-classes... , if you keep the basic idea in mind the details are easy to follow.
0.2 + 0.1 === 0.3 That's not really a JS problem, that's a floating point problem. Plenty of languages will have the same issue. +!![] "" - - "" (null - 0) + "0" Calling these things weird is fair enough but I can't help thinking this is code you'd never actually write outside of the context of a "Look how weird JS is!" post. It's like picking examples from the Annual Obfuscated C Contest to show how hard it is to un…
Carmack-like people utilising this stuff for good are few and far between, for your everyday joe programmer this is a footgun, a very-nonobvious and non-intuitive one (hence footgun moniker) that they write in crunch, it slips past reviews because reviewers are just joes with couple extra years, if at all, and then whrn things break after deployment, its an absolute pain to debug.
These examples are amusing but irrelevant. What I find sorely lacking is sane syntax for working with arrays. Eyeing Python with envy every time. And some pattern matching would be nice too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why the hell can websites tell that I'm in the console? If I want to inspect some parts of a website (perhaps save an image), then I don't want that website to interfere.
They don’t. They just use “console.log”, you see it because you opened the console. It’s not like they know you’re there and then write a message.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a similar feeling recently using Swift for a project. Pure JavaScript is definitely a bit too loose for my liking, but I thought Swift went a bit too far in the other direction.
I had that experience with Swift for maybe the first 2 days I used it. Nowadays I really appreciate Swift’s strictness. It just helps prevent so many stupid mistakes. I worked on a high-profile project for my company under a strict deadline and Swift was a major part in ensuring we delivered a rock-solid implementation in record time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of them are stretched examples, others comes from other languages/constraints (floating point, octal, ...), but some other are legitimately weird and error prone: [1, 2, 3] + [4, 5, 6] // -> "1,2,34,5,6" [,,,].length // -> 3
Both of these examples are well-known (and not unexpected) behaviours. I assume you already know why it behaves like that. If not, I can explain it. > [1, 2, 3] + [4, 5, 6] // -> "1,2,34,5,6" What would you expect instead? > [,,,].length // -> 3 Is there any use case where you would want to deal with sparse arrays?
> What would you expect instead?
If I let my first instinct speak:
[1,2,3,4,5,6]
And then if I think a little more, then maybe:
[5,7,9] //with obvious caveats
In no way do I expect what GP actually provided.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's not really a JS problem, that's a floating point problem More accurately it's a binary problem. 0.1 and 0.3 have non-terminating representations in binary, so it's completely irrelevant whether you're using fixed or floating point. Any number that can be represented as the sum of powers of 2 and 5 have a terminating decimal representation, whereas only numbers that can be represented as the sum of powers of…
It's not a binary problem, it's a particular binary representation problem. You can represent 0.1 and 0.3 such that it terminates. In Java for example just use BigDecimal (integer unscaled value + integer scale) and you are ok.
> integer unscaled value + integer scale
binary float does the same, just using 2^exp instead of 10^exp for scale.