Live data from Hacker News

How JavaScript works: 3 types of polymorphism

blog.sessionstack.com

51–52 of 52 posts

Re: How JavaScript works: 3 types of polymorphism

#51

I've never developed for the web out of fear of talking employers into recruiting me as a UI/UX designer. I've also been pretty thrown off over Web Development being known as a massive mess. I've worked on desktop applications in C# so far. Is web development anymore pleasant or is it all just muckwork?

I develop front-end, mostly React, and I find it to be a lot of fun. The large community has resulted in some amazing tooling, and the unopinionatedness of React means I can write code in the way I like.

> I've never developed for the web out of fear of talking employers into recruiting me as a UI/UX designer.

I do think that as developers we need to help with design in some limited ways. Often designers will miss things. How is this going to look at different screen widths? Is this accessible? Does this function the way users expect websites to function? I give quite a bit of feedback to designers I work with. But nobody who ever saw me design something from the ground up would try to get me to do it full-time.

Re: How JavaScript works: 3 types of polymorphism

#52
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, "You don't know what you're talking about." :) There is a clear judgement on your part. For me my own recent DK-moment was I'm learning a foreign language and in a shop asked for a simple item with a simple phrase, sure I had it right. They had no idea what I meant and I got angry because I thought you were just trolling me. Relating situation to a friend who let me know my accent was just wrong, so hard to und…

I disagree with some of what you say, but I think your last point is correct. >you yourself may be mistaken in your JS criticism It should be easy to verify I'm not. `__proto__` is indeed bad practice [0] and I'm pretty sure criticism of `var` vs. `let` and `const` is a Google search away. Same idea for the other problems I listed, but the details are besides the point. >There is a clear judgement on your part I'm no…

Cool, yeah I wasn't saying that your JS was good or bad, just the possibility of it being so. I'm with you, I think you're good at JS, but then I don't really know. And neither, in truth, do you. We're both judging.

I think you need to remain open to the possibility, not just of DK but of we all have something to learn. I think I'm pretty good at JS and have popular projects and good test scores, but I also fail some JS questions (the other day in the FB PE screen I couldn't work out that the regex /^sep\n$/g wouldn't actually match. I was confused and thought the newline was needed as well as the $. Haha. Just one example.) I try to give my self a rating of 7. Keeping open to the possibility of being wrong, is more important than being right or wrong. I can't really explain it right now (maybe one reason is it's super late here, another might be I just don't know how to explain it right now) but I feel that humility is important, more so the more you know and the better your skill. Somehow I feel more humility make your skill better, especially the more skill you have.

Thanks for your humble and vulnerable example, I appreciate it! It gives you great credibility. If you were more open to the possibility of things you don't know, and not so absolutist about your JS knowledge, I would have felt you were even more credible.

Finally, you have a blindspot. You can't see that you judgement of the JS skill was actually a judgement. Because you're so sure you're right about it. Ties in with what I said before about humble and open to wrong. Of course it's a judgement, it's a "you think" it's like this, not a "it is like this". There are other perspectives that are valid. I think if you see that, then it will make wielding this big sword you have an easier and more pleasant experience! :P ;) xx

Post reply on HN