Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

sicp.comp.nus.edu.sg

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 188 posts

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#121

Post by tombert »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #114
b0rsuk wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Few people do that outside of code obfuscation contests, but the point is JS has heaps of gotchas like that, each waiting to bite you. How about: x = 5; (no var declaration). Extremely easy to do by accident. Lots of these will be left for backwards compatibility. In JS errors often go silent and I developed a strong dislike for any language that does that, including Vimscript and Lua (and I do like Vim).

No JS developer would do that. We all know that is global. Nowadays you use `const` or `let`. Any JS developer will have a linter that will tell them incase they somehow made that mistake.

Eh, I actually like JS but I have definitely forgotten to add a "var" or "let" a few times, or sometimes I will do it correctly, get a bit overzealous with cutting, and accidentally remove the initial var declaration.

I'm not saying that it breaks the language, but it definitely is irritating, especially if you're not using a linter.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#122

Post by tchaffee »

vmchale wrote: post #78
scottoreily wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical dramatic Hacker News user. JS is a great language and enjoyed by millions of developers.

> JS is a great language literally no one believes this

I love it and think it's a great language. It has bad parts, but they are easy to avoid, especially with a modern linter. So there you go. You're wrong. At least one experienced developer who has coded in many languages thinks JavaScript is a great language.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#123

Post by Kwantuum »

vmchale wrote: post #78
scottoreily wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical dramatic Hacker News user. JS is a great language and enjoyed by millions of developers.

> JS is a great language literally no one believes this

I do.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#125

Post by jancsika »

voldacar wrote: post #3

There's kind of a reason why SICP was written in Scheme in mind and not a blub language...

Holy shit I love that term "blub language."

I'm just imagining someone taking the text of Crockford's talks on Javascript, removing all his clear description of the language features, and replacing it with highly opinionated non-technical terms of derision like this.

Though not instructive, it would be really fun to read.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#126

Post by ausjke »

ryeights wrote: post #120
MisterOctober wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like JS. I use JS daily. JS is part of the workflow for nearly everyone I know who works with code. For me, ES6 is fantastic to use. Some of the better books on JS [I'm thinking specifically of Haverbeke's "Eloquent Javascript"] are general computing classics in their own right. I used to be a snob about JS, due to the fact that in the 90s / early 2000s, it had major shortcomings and produced a lot of slow, crashy…

JS is a terrible language. The amount of pitfalls, language features you must avoid, and obscure paradigms you must follow to make JS usable is mind-boggling. Just because you can use JS well doesn't mean it's a good language.

no longer is too good or too bad, it depends on how much time you spent on it and how good you're at it actually.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#127

Post by ritchiea »

b0rsuk wrote: post #49

Every now and then a great movie comes out. Then it gets its American remake. It's been proven you can put Al Pacino, Robert de Niro and Bruce Willis in any movie (with predictable results!). This is the book equivalent of an American remake for me. Is Javascript the new pseudocode? Honestly I'd rather be forced to learn a new language to understand a book than to read the book adapted to JS.

To dang and the other moderators, can you think of a way to auto-penalize effectively contentless/empty anti-Javascript comments?

Imagine this kind of comment for any other language, C, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scheme whatever. It would be downvoted to death. And yet people still make & upvote these comments about JS despite JS being the most popular language, run on the most devices & having a massive community of people fixing its warts and modernizing JS.

There are still valid critiques of JS but they have nothing to do with Al Pacino or Bruce Willis. Please spare us, or if you want to criticize Javascript, learn something about Javascript in 2019 & criticize that.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#128

Post by kaycebasques »

jessaustin wrote: post #36
nhlx2 wrote: post #22

Adaption - another term for adaptation.

It's a perfectly cromulent word, but at the link only "adaptation" appears.

> It’s a perfectly cromulent word

TIL: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/what-does-crom...

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#129

Post by lowtolerance »

vmchale wrote: post #78
scottoreily wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical dramatic Hacker News user. JS is a great language and enjoyed by millions of developers.

> JS is a great language literally no one believes this

Literally no one is impressed by your cynicism.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#130

Post by b0rsuk »

protonimitate wrote: post #116
scottoreily wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical dramatic Hacker News user. JS is a great language and enjoyed by millions of developers.

Agreed. I'm pretty sick of the anti-JS kneejerk rhetoric that happens here. It adds zero value to any discussion. It's nothing more than a desperate attempt to gain some internet points. It's a popular language and it has flaws, but that doesn't automatically make it worthy of the amount of hate it receives here. This type of discussion has more in common with /r/iamverysmart than it does with valuable discourse that…

I do enjoy "Professor Frisby's Mostly Adequate Guide to Functional Programming", which uses JS examples extensively. Despite the fact my last job was mostly JS, I had to look up functions all the time and stretch my brain muscles. Modern JS is different than "keep it the same" JS. But... converting a book to a different programming language rubs me the wrong way. I miss an opportunity to see another language, too. It's not even some very arcane language. If it really was a knee-jerk reaction, I'd have said:

"Learn less edition", or "2D remake"

So please stop with that strawman.

Post reply on HN