81–90 of 103 posts
I guess you had to be there. I can see why someone might find this funny, but honestly, nothing is that funny. Some behavior in Javascript is surprising, but not that surprising.
This is incredibly funny, but does anyone know why the interpreter makes such bizarre decisions? Why wouldn't it be preferable to just throw up errors?
The Ruby stuff apparently isn't bizarre. From what I've read, Ruby creates variables as it encounters an assignment to them when parsing the code. So, when you have a = a in your code, Ruby creates the variable a before it ever tries to actually execute the assignment. If later, when it has finished parsing everything, and starts executing, that statement fails because b is not defined, you still end up with variable…
Guess I'm not a hacker? It's like watching a rerun I've seen twice over with the laugh track turned up to 11 (just to clarify, someone said it was a repost but I haven't seen it before).
Really? You don't think this is funny at all? Maybe it's because I'm in my mid twenties, but I think my father would even find this funny and he knows little to none about programming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
wow, you must be the best hacker ever congrats
I understand the downvotes since this is HN and you people don't like useless comments here. But I simply thought it was very funny. No need to be mean here.
No, I wasn't one of the ones who downvoted you and no, I'm not trying to be mean. There used to be times I wondered why an innocent comment of mine was downvoted and thought I'd just let you know instead of leave you hanging.
Guess I'm not a hacker? It's like watching a rerun I've seen twice over with the laugh track turned up to 11 (just to clarify, someone said it was a repost but I haven't seen it before).
Really? You don't think this is funny at all? Maybe it's because I'm in my mid twenties, but I think my father would even find this funny and he knows little to none about programming.
Does anybody knows which is the javascript interpreter he is using on the screencast?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? You don't think this is funny at all? Maybe it's because I'm in my mid twenties, but I think my father would even find this funny and he knows little to none about programming.
The humor is playing on an inclination to laugh at things we don't understand, which seems counter to the hacker ethos. Software is hard, and there may be deep reasons in the dynamic type systems that cause these languages to work like this, or there may not be, but either way this type of thing is interesting and seems to demand some further explanation and/or justification. I find it interesting but don't get the h…
I think is simply laughing at absurdity: the gulf between intention and actuality. We have quite a bit of that.
Have I been pronouncing "wat" wrong all this time? I just assumed it was like "what" but ... not.
Perhaps some memes should never be vocalized.