alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 year agoPick a side Javascriptlemmy.worldimagemessage-square43fedilinkarrow-up1707arrow-down137
arrow-up1670arrow-down1imagePick a side Javascriptlemmy.worldalphacyberranger@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square43fedilink
minus-squareComment105@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down9·1 year agoJava devs are prima mental gymnasticists, always able to make anything make sense.
minus-squareKonlanx@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up77·edit-21 year agoJS !== Java Try Javascript some day! We have truthy and falsy! Empty string or null? Yeah, that’s false! Of course we can parse a string to number, but if it’s not a number it’s NaN! null >= 0 is true! Assign a variable with =, test type equality with == and test actual equality with ===. You will NEVER use the wrong amount of = anywhere, trust me! Our default sort converts everything to string, then sorts by UTF-16 code. So yes, [1, 10, 3] is sorted and you are going to live with it. True + true = 2. You know I’m right. Try Javascript today!
minus-squareDurotar@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up14·1 year ago Our default sort converts everything to string, then sorts by UTF-16 code. So yes, [1, 10, 3] is sorted and you are going to live with it. I’m not sure whether this is satire or not.
minus-squareKonlanx@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up59arrow-down1·edit-21 year agoIt’s not. The default sorter does that, because that way it can sort pretty much anything without breaking at runtime. You can overwrite it easily, though. For the example above you could simply do it like this: [3, 1, 10].sort((a, b) => a - b) Returns: [1, 3, 10]
minus-squarenewIdentity@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 year agoHoly shit that’s actually true. I just tried it
minus-squaresociablefish@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year ago The default sorter does that, because that way it can sort pretty much anything without breaking at runtime. who the fuck decided that not breaking at runtime was more important than making sense? this js example of [1, 3, 10].sort() vs [1, 3, 10].sort((a, b) => a - b) will be my go to example of why good defaults are important
minus-squaresociablefish@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agowho uses utf 16? people either use utf 8 (for files) or utf 32 (for string class O(1) random access)
minus-squareComment105@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-21 year agoI made the thing in the thing print “hello world” with C# once, is Javascript for me?
minus-squareBeanie@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoTrue + true = 2. I’ve heard memes about Javascript, but jeez. It’s really that bad?
minus-squareSouthernCanadian@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoAs a js dev, I will gymnastically take that as a compliment
Java devs are prima mental gymnasticists, always able to make anything make sense.
JS !== Java
Try Javascript some day!
Try Javascript today!
I’m not sure whether this is satire or not.
It’s not. The default sorter does that, because that way it can sort pretty much anything without breaking at runtime. You can overwrite it easily, though. For the example above you could simply do it like this:
[3, 1, 10].sort((a, b) => a - b)Returns:
[1, 3, 10]Holy shit that’s actually true. I just tried it
who the fuck decided that not breaking at runtime was more important than making sense?
this js example of
[1, 3, 10].sort()vs[1, 3, 10].sort((a, b) => a - b)will be my go to example of why good defaults are importantwho uses utf 16? people either use utf 8 (for files) or utf 32 (for string class O(1) random access)
I made the thing in the thing print “hello world” with C# once, is Javascript for me?
True + true = 2. I’ve heard memes about Javascript, but jeez. It’s really that bad?As a js dev, I will gymnastically take that as a compliment