Is JavaScript getting worse?
buzzdecafe.github.io
Is JavaScript getting worse?
1–10 of 117 posts
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#2I like `let`. It means you have to be implicit and actually be aware of what you're doing.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#3I'm sorry, but I really see no point in this article.
Do you realize that if the optional arguments were not included in Function#length, you'd just be saying "They are not reflected in the function’s length property. C'mon, man" instead ?
Also, I don't understand Whoop-dee-freakin’-doo.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#4This is one of the few posts about javascript that I've encountered that sees hoisting as a good thing. I like `let`.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#5I'm sorry, but I really see no point in this article. Do you realize that if the optional arguments were not included in Function#length, you'd just be saying "They are not reflected in the function’s length property. C'mon, man" instead ? Also, I don't understand Whoop-dee-freakin’-doo.
"They are not reflected in the function’s length property" is exactly what the article does say.
Whoop-dee-freakin’-doo
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#6This is one of the few posts about javascript that I've encountered that sees hoisting as a good thing. I like `let`.
Have you read the linked article about typeof? Normally, it's safe to do typeof possiblyUndeclaredVariable, but if later in the function you do let possiblyUndeclaredVariable it starts the scope defined as "uninitialized", which causes typeof to throw.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#7I like `let`. It means you have to be implicit and actually be aware of what you're doing.
That part of the article isn't particularly clear. The intended behavior of let is great. The unintended behavior - that it can cause typeof to fail - is bad.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#8This is one of the few posts about javascript that I've encountered that sees hoisting as a good thing. I like `let`.
Have you read the linked article about typeof? Normally, it's safe to do typeof possiblyUndeclaredVariable, but if later in the function you do let possiblyUndeclaredVariable it starts the scope defined as "uninitialized", which causes typeof to throw.
Well that's perfectly normal in a properly scoped language.
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#9Betteridge's law[1] strikes again.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines
Re: Is JavaScript getting worse?
#10I don't understand the benefit of fat arrow. I actually think it decreases the readability. What does lexical "this" binding mean?