JS is a language where [1,2,11].sort() returns [1,11,2].
And if you use a variable instead of a bare array, half the functions are side-effectful, as determined by coin toss.
And if you try declaring that variable with new Array(3).map() then it will ignore all 3 indices, because undefined is real enough to be enumerated, but not real enough to be iterated, because, and I cannot overstress the importance of this principle in Javascript, go fuck yourself. Go fuck yourself is why.
Array(3) doesn’t create [undefined, undefined, undefined, ]; it creates [/* hole */, /* hole */, /* hole */, ]. The holes don’t set any property on the array whatsoever, so they are skipped when iterating. How this makes sense, I can’t tell you.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
I am not good friends with js, what did I miss?
Not a JS dev either but
===.Not really sure what the
(+x)is aboutthe remainder operator should return a number or a NaN right? do we actually need the triple here?
Not really. But with JS it’s better safe than sorry.
The GP’s addition is unnecessary, but I fully support anyone that decides to do it.
point taken!
This evaluates to NaN for some reason:
Since JS doesn’t really differentiate strings from numbers, except on the places it does, it makes sense to make sure you are working with numbers.
Oh right that. I guess I was visualizing a scenario where you already checked for it being a number, such as a Number.isInteger(x)
also, that suprises me a lot, you’d think this is one of the places where it treats stuff as numbers
JS is a language where
[1,2,11].sort()returns[1,11,2].And if you use a variable instead of a bare array, half the functions are side-effectful, as determined by coin toss.
And if you try declaring that variable with
new Array(3).map()then it will ignore all 3 indices, becauseundefinedis real enough to be enumerated, but not real enough to be iterated, because, and I cannot overstress the importance of this principle in Javascript, go fuck yourself. Go fuck yourself is why.We wrote it wrong on purpose, as a joke.
The Wimp Lo doctrine is a valid theory for why JS is Like That.
If there’s two ways to do something, JS picks all three.
typeof(null) == ‘object’
Because some people think planning an entirely new language should take less than 2 weeks. 10 days, in this case.
See wat for more.
Array(3)doesn’t create[undefined, undefined, undefined, ]; it creates[/* hole */, /* hole */, /* hole */, ]. The holes don’t set any property on the array whatsoever, so they are skipped when iterating. How this makes sense, I can’t tell you.Yet the array contains exactly three nothings.
It’s like a zen koan.
Time is a flat circle