How true hackers write JavaScript • Hacker News Board

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#11

Post by pygy_ » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:22 AM UTC

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

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#12

Post by gear54rus » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:22 AM UTC

TAForObvReasons wrote: post #8

https://twitter.com/triskweline/status/798443082740023296 > Valve's Steam Store renders on the server, uses ancient jQuery 1.8, loads 12 unminified JavaScripts. > It moved 3.5 billion dollars in 2015.

And burned 3.5 trillion developer brain cells just this january. Sensationalist metrics like this belong in the same trash bin as 'js is objectively bad and non-serious' bs.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#13

Post by mullikine » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:24 AM UTC

any more javascript than this and you're probably making something that's full of ads

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#14

Post by arendtio » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:25 AM UTC

While I appreciate the JS on this page (for usability reasons), I was surprised by the amount (149 lines) that is used for a page which looks like plain HTML.

Nevertheless, the code looks kinda beautiful.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#15

Post by adamjc » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:27 AM UTC

Either run it through a minifier or have the whole thing unminified, these single lined functions look horrific, and are saving characters for the sake of it.

Terrible naming, e.g. 'vis' -> reading the function it means toggle visibility, so it should be called 'toggleVisibility', you shouldn't have to read what the function is doing to understand what it will do.

You ever get a bug in your code, It's not fun to look back at badly maintained code and go 'oh, shit, what does this do again?'.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#16

Post by whydoineedthis » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:27 AM UTC

gear54rus wrote: post #12

TAForObvReasons wrote: post #8

https://twitter.com/triskweline/status/798443082740023296 > Valve's Steam Store renders on the server, uses ancient jQuery 1.8, loads 12 unminified JavaScripts. > It moved 3.5 billion dollars in 2015.

And burned 3.5 trillion developer brain cells just this january. Sensationalist metrics like this belong in the same trash bin as 'js is objectively bad and non-serious' bs.

so actual information is bad and "3.5 trillion brain cells burned" is good? Hrm....yeah, I'm going to Steam approach and focus on features that matter to the user rather than pedantic code which serves nothing but the developers ego in a vast majority of cases.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#17

Post by gear54rus » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:28 AM UTC

whydoineedthis wrote: post #16

gear54rus wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And burned 3.5 trillion developer brain cells just this january. Sensationalist metrics like this belong in the same trash bin as 'js is objectively bad and non-serious' bs.

so actual information is bad and "3.5 trillion brain cells burned" is good? Hrm....yeah, I'm going to Steam approach and focus on features that matter to the user rather than pedantic code which serves nothing but the developers ego in a vast majority of cases.

your choice, it's your cells :) I would not want to dot that to my sanity.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#18

Post by oh-kumudo » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:28 AM UTC

The code is very much readable, without suffering from being concise. Love it.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#19

Post by saagarjha » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:29 AM UTC

Hacker News also works pretty well without JavaScript at all, which is really nice. Not something that I use often, but it comes in handy when you want to post a comment from your potato device that can't handle the modern web.

Re: How true hackers write JavaScript

#20

Post by jm547ster » Wed, Sep 05, 2018, 7:29 AM UTC

Tajnymag wrote: post #4

That might be one of the most readable pieces of code that I've ever read.

Really? Plenty of needlessly abbreviated function names IMO. At a quick glance is it immediately obvious what posf or arem are without looking into the context in which they're being used? Don't get me wrong it's a nice piece of code but super-readable it isn't.