subreddit
stringclasses
7 values
author
stringlengths
3
20
id
stringlengths
5
7
content
stringlengths
67
30.4k
score
int64
0
140k
loljs
kenman
dk3wwjg
<|soss|><|sot|>Should acronyms be spelled all caps or camel case? XMLHttpRequest: Why not both?<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>[deleted]<|eor|><|sor|>As is HTTP...<|eor|><|sor|>as is REQUEST<|eor|><|sor|>No? `Request` is literally the word _request_ -- it's not an acronym.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
11
loljs
mort96
dir5a82
<|soss|><|sot|>Should acronyms be spelled all caps or camel case? XMLHttpRequest: Why not both?<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>I also haven't really ever seen anyone actually use it for XML, it's mostly used for JSON.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
fact_hunt
3odiun
<|sols|><|sot|>NodeJS: stripping comments can speed up your code<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@c2c/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
34
loljs
Vortico
cvwaios
<|sols|><|sot|>NodeJS: stripping comments can speed up your code<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/@c2c/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|sor|>Also switching to tab-indention or fewer-spaces indention would do it.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
TheShyro
8n13p3
<|sols|><|sot|>NPM stops working with proxies, returns "418 I'm a teapot"<|eot|><|sol|>https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/20791<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
29
loljs
SpoliatorX
dztc8k7
<|sols|><|sot|>NPM stops working with proxies, returns "418 I'm a teapot"<|eot|><|sol|>https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/20791<|eol|><|sor|>While that *is* a valid HTTP status code I feel like it's probably not correct for them to use it here<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
CyberDiablo
d3jc46
<|sols|><|sot|>Why ['1', '7', '11'].map(parseInt) returns [1, NaN, 3] in Javascript<|eot|><|sol|>https://medium.com/dailyjs/parseint-mystery-7c4368ef7b21<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
24
loljs
WASDx
3k89jb
<|sols|><|sot|>Doing a javascript online test, this was probably the hardest question.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/aXNeZ76.png<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
26
loljs
opatut
cuvt1j5
<|sols|><|sot|>Doing a javascript online test, this was probably the hardest question.<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/aXNeZ76.png<|eol|><|sor|>Answer: [Hover for Spoiler](/s "C, D, E should not be left blank") <|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
hhalahh
46fy4y
<|sols|><|sot|>reducing comment length (and presumably variable length) gives 50% speedup<|eot|><|sol|>https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
25
loljs
hhalahh
d05f579
<|sols|><|sot|>reducing comment length (and presumably variable length) gives 50% speedup<|eot|><|sol|>https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|sor|>There is a reason for the 600 char limit though. It is not like it is a magic gain. The 600 char limit exists to decide whether a function should be inlined or not. Inline expansion is when the compiler puts the whole function in your cpus instruction cache. The downside of this is that it will take longer to find all other functions. Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit, do not make the limit larger than necessary; although the time to run that single function will go down, **the time to run all functions afterwards will go up.** Instead of calling a function from another function 500000000 times maybe look for a way to refactor your code. > >[ As a rule of thumb, some inlining will improve speed at very minor cost of space, but excess inlining will hurt speed, due to inlined code consuming too much of the instruction cache, and also cost significant space.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_expansion)<|eor|><|soopr|>>Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit \>implying I use JS more than once a year you'd think they'd at least count AST nodes or something instead of text length<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
esquilax
d060bjr
<|sols|><|sot|>reducing comment length (and presumably variable length) gives 50% speedup<|eot|><|sol|>https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|sor|>There is a reason for the 600 char limit though. It is not like it is a magic gain. The 600 char limit exists to decide whether a function should be inlined or not. Inline expansion is when the compiler puts the whole function in your cpus instruction cache. The downside of this is that it will take longer to find all other functions. Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit, do not make the limit larger than necessary; although the time to run that single function will go down, **the time to run all functions afterwards will go up.** Instead of calling a function from another function 500000000 times maybe look for a way to refactor your code. > >[ As a rule of thumb, some inlining will improve speed at very minor cost of space, but excess inlining will hurt speed, due to inlined code consuming too much of the instruction cache, and also cost significant space.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_expansion)<|eor|><|soopr|>>Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit \>implying I use JS more than once a year you'd think they'd at least count AST nodes or something instead of text length<|eoopr|><|sor|>You know the story of function naming in PHP being used to balance out a hash table with a shitty hash function, right?<|eor|><|soopr|>heard something similar to that but never read about it<|eoopr|><|sor|>http://i-programmer.info/news/98-languages/6758-the-reason-for-the-weird-php-function-names.html lolci (laughing out loud, crying inside)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
esquilax
d05sl70
<|sols|><|sot|>reducing comment length (and presumably variable length) gives 50% speedup<|eot|><|sol|>https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|sor|>There is a reason for the 600 char limit though. It is not like it is a magic gain. The 600 char limit exists to decide whether a function should be inlined or not. Inline expansion is when the compiler puts the whole function in your cpus instruction cache. The downside of this is that it will take longer to find all other functions. Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit, do not make the limit larger than necessary; although the time to run that single function will go down, **the time to run all functions afterwards will go up.** Instead of calling a function from another function 500000000 times maybe look for a way to refactor your code. > >[ As a rule of thumb, some inlining will improve speed at very minor cost of space, but excess inlining will hurt speed, due to inlined code consuming too much of the instruction cache, and also cost significant space.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_expansion)<|eor|><|soopr|>>Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit \>implying I use JS more than once a year you'd think they'd at least count AST nodes or something instead of text length<|eoopr|><|sor|>You know the story of function naming in PHP being used to balance out a hash table with a shitty hash function, right?<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
esquilax
d0xcil7
<|sols|><|sot|>reducing comment length (and presumably variable length) gives 50% speedup<|eot|><|sol|>https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization-advice-7353b820c92e<|eol|><|sor|>There is a reason for the 600 char limit though. It is not like it is a magic gain. The 600 char limit exists to decide whether a function should be inlined or not. Inline expansion is when the compiler puts the whole function in your cpus instruction cache. The downside of this is that it will take longer to find all other functions. Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit, do not make the limit larger than necessary; although the time to run that single function will go down, **the time to run all functions afterwards will go up.** Instead of calling a function from another function 500000000 times maybe look for a way to refactor your code. > >[ As a rule of thumb, some inlining will improve speed at very minor cost of space, but excess inlining will hurt speed, due to inlined code consuming too much of the instruction cache, and also cost significant space.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_expansion)<|eor|><|soopr|>>Do not minify huge code to try and fit it under the limit \>implying I use JS more than once a year you'd think they'd at least count AST nodes or something instead of text length<|eoopr|><|sor|>You know the story of function naming in PHP being used to balance out a hash table with a shitty hash function, right?<|eor|><|sor|>strlen is not a hash function.<|eor|><|sor|>Well *I* know that...<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
OdinCasino
n25c8n
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
21
loljs
Earhacker
gwhcrto
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>JavaScript, invented in 1995, isn't Y2K compliant.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
11
loljs
jordan314
gwhokub
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>JavaScript, invented in 1995, isn't Y2K compliant.<|eor|><|sor|>They couldn't think 5 years ahead?<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
OdinCasino
gwi6r9m
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>JavaScript, invented in 1995, isn't Y2K compliant.<|eor|><|sor|>They couldn't think 5 years ahead?<|eor|><|soopr|>This is when boomers where in their 30's writing stuff... of course they didnt think 5 years ahead. i wonder what the origin of "where do you see yourself in 5 years" is...<|eoopr|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
Aphix
gwjl50s
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>.getFullYear()<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
Aphix
gwjlcjf
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>wtf happened 121 years ago?<|eor|><|sor|>1900, which was considered bt some to be a better start of the epoch than 1970<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
JayCroghan
gwieqny
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>JavaScript, invented in 1995, isn't Y2K compliant.<|eor|><|sor|>They couldn't think 5 years ahead?<|eor|><|sor|>lol most software written in the 90s was thought to be temporary. >Surely someone will do this better shorty, I just need this for the time being.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
Krenair
gwj958s
<|soss|><|sot|>(new Date()).getYear() === 121<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>wtf happened 121 years ago?<|eor|><|sor|>nothing, it just isn't Y2K compliant. it used to be very common to give years relative to 1900. caused a whole lot of silliness around the turn of the century<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
ThisIsADogHello
4p286n
<|sols|><|sot|>If the first argument to `setTimeout` is a string, it will be implicitly `eval`'ed [x-post /r/ProgrammerTIL]<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerTIL/comments/4oxr7b/javascript_if_the_first_argument_to_settimeout_is/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
24
loljs
sheldonkreger
474sd6
<|sols|><|sot|>The Node.js Event Loop is a Damn Mess<|eot|><|sol|>http://sheldonkreger.com/the-nodejs-event-loop-is-a-damn-mess.html<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
19
loljs
loljs
2elo78
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js leadership<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/AZJti8I.png<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
20
loljs
Harkins
ckwpz4b
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js leadership<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/AZJti8I.png<|eol|><|sor|>This is missing a tweet from @izs, which I think goes right above (and thus temporally after) @garybernhardts's "This toot makes me mad." > @garybernhardt Sounds like you have feelings. You should seek a therapist, or a close friend. (Note that I am neither.)<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
dry_hopped
ckws3c4
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js leadership<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/AZJti8I.png<|eol|><|sor|>What a waste of everybody's time an attention.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
kmark937
ck9nbkb
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js leadership<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/AZJti8I.png<|eol|><|sor|>>Thanks, blocked 8 tweets after "Sorry, our time is up."<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
pcopley
cmm9sa1
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js leadership<|eot|><|sol|>http://i.imgur.com/AZJti8I.png<|eol|><|sor|>I know this is 3 months old, but I just felt the need to come here and state that @izs is a piece of shit. Thank you for your time.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
Takeoded
npspu3
<|soss|><|sot|>NaN is iterable<|eot|><|sost|>``` > Array.from(undefined) < VM528:1 Uncaught TypeError: undefined is not iterable (cannot read property Symbol(Symbol.iterator)) at Function.from (<anonymous>) at <anonymous>:1:7 (anonymous) @ VM528:1 > Array.from(null) < VM596:1 Uncaught TypeError: object null is not iterable (cannot read property Symbol(Symbol.iterator)) at Function.from (<anonymous>) at <anonymous>:1:7 (anonymous) @ VM596:1 > Array.from(NaN) < [] ```<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
17
loljs
Apollidore
h07akex
<|soss|><|sot|>NaN is iterable<|eot|><|sost|>``` > Array.from(undefined) < VM528:1 Uncaught TypeError: undefined is not iterable (cannot read property Symbol(Symbol.iterator)) at Function.from (<anonymous>) at <anonymous>:1:7 (anonymous) @ VM528:1 > Array.from(null) < VM596:1 Uncaught TypeError: object null is not iterable (cannot read property Symbol(Symbol.iterator)) at Function.from (<anonymous>) at <anonymous>:1:7 (anonymous) @ VM596:1 > Array.from(NaN) < [] ```<|eost|><|sor|>I've checked why, this is because Array.from(YYY) calls an internal JS function called GetMethod to get @@iterator ([https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Iteration\_protocols](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Iteration_protocols)) from YYY and GetMethod will throw an Error if YYY is null or undefined Every other non-iterable YYY will be converted to an Object (so NaN becomes a Number), which is considered as an array-like object whose length is 0 By the way the title is wrong, NaN is not iterable as it doesn't have any @@iterator but the confusion is understandable!<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
g00glen00b
3clv62
<|soss|><|sot|>Who was first, the function or the object?<|eot|><|sost|> Object instanceof Function; // true Function instanceof Object; // true Looks like a chicken/egg problem to me, which one was first, the `Object` or the `Function`?<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
18
loljs
krznpsk
cswruoy
<|soss|><|sot|>Who was first, the function or the object?<|eot|><|sost|> Object instanceof Function; // true Function instanceof Object; // true Looks like a chicken/egg problem to me, which one was first, the `Object` or the `Function`?<|eost|><|sor|>Both the chicken and the egg share a common ancestor<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
Takeoded
vl77n1
<|sols|><|sot|>Number properties are silently lost/discarded/undefined<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/efcf4li0iz791.png<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
17
loljs
Takeoded
idtdvno
<|sols|><|sot|>Number properties are silently lost/discarded/undefined<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/efcf4li0iz791.png<|eol|><|soopr|>luckily things are better with "use strict": ``` (function(){ "use strict"; let i=5; i.foo="wut"; })(); ``` gives >Uncaught TypeError: Cannot create property 'foo' on number '5'<|eoopr|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
Ragnagord
4fpnkr
<|sols|><|sot|>Why does [5,6,8,7][1,2] = 8 in Javascript?<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7421013/why-does-5-6-8-71-2-8-in-javascript<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
15
loljs
z500
d2ax4t0
<|sols|><|sot|>Why does [5,6,8,7][1,2] = 8 in Javascript?<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7421013/why-does-5-6-8-71-2-8-in-javascript<|eol|><|sor|>The comma operator is my favorite dirty C trick. It's so obscure, but C-style languages still bring the comma operator with them. Ever initialize more than one variable in the initializer of a for loop without questioning it? You were using the comma operator.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
Laugarhraun
2m9rp6
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.js production release ships with no longer supported (by anyone) version of V8<|eot|><|sol|>https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=3692#c6<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
16
loljs
MazeChaZer
7g37g2
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
14
loljs
MazeChaZer
dqgd9a3
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>Yes? The argument is not stored as exposed properties on the object. `JSON.stringify`only handles exposed properties. This'll work just fine: JSON.stringify(Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3]))) Although, it changes the contents form an object to an array. Not a loljs. Just /r/shittyprogramming<|eor|><|soopr|>Your statement that `JSON.stringify` only handles exposed properties is not correct. Any object in JavaScript can implement a method called `toJSON` to define a custom serialization strategy. This works for the `Date` class: `JSON.stringify(new Date()) === '"2017-11-28T14:04:16.326Z"'`. I know that it works when you use `Array.from`, but why doesn't the `Set` class provide a useful `toJSON` implementation by itself?<|eoopr|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
17
loljs
suspiciously_calm
dqh6t0d
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>Yes? The argument is not stored as exposed properties on the object. `JSON.stringify`only handles exposed properties. This'll work just fine: JSON.stringify(Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3]))) Although, it changes the contents form an object to an array. Not a loljs. Just /r/shittyprogramming<|eor|><|sor|>Yes, simply accepting everything under the sun and silently serializing it as an empty object instead of raising an error is very much a loljs. The fact that this loosey typey approach is burned into the language and can't easily be unfucked is an even bigger loljs.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
17
loljs
suspiciously_calm
dqh8fam
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>Yes? The argument is not stored as exposed properties on the object. `JSON.stringify`only handles exposed properties. This'll work just fine: JSON.stringify(Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3]))) Although, it changes the contents form an object to an array. Not a loljs. Just /r/shittyprogramming<|eor|><|sor|>Yes, simply accepting everything under the sun and silently serializing it as an empty object instead of raising an error is very much a loljs. The fact that this loosey typey approach is burned into the language and can't easily be unfucked is an even bigger loljs.<|eor|><|sor|>I couldn't disagree more. :) You cannot expect any object - native or otherwise - to be serializable. The interface of `Set` is utilized incorrectly in the example in the topic. The language does exactly what it should and as one should expect. There's no quirkiness going on. It's completely reliable. It's not a loljs.<|eor|><|sor|>> You cannot expect any object - native or otherwise - to be serializable. So you should get an error when you try.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
17
loljs
kafoso
dqh1nlc
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>Yes? The argument is not stored as exposed properties on the object. `JSON.stringify`only handles exposed properties. This'll work just fine: JSON.stringify(Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3]))) Although, it changes the contents form an object to an array. Not a loljs. Just /r/shittyprogramming<|eor|><|soopr|>Your statement that `JSON.stringify` only handles exposed properties is not correct. Any object in JavaScript can implement a method called `toJSON` to define a custom serialization strategy. This works for the `Date` class: `JSON.stringify(new Date()) === '"2017-11-28T14:04:16.326Z"'`. I know that it works when you use `Array.from`, but why doesn't the `Set` class provide a useful `toJSON` implementation by itself?<|eoopr|><|sor|>`toJSON` is exposure. Same with `toString`. I do agree it would probably have made sense to have a `Set.toJSON` function available. But you cannot assume it exists on any object, really.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
kafoso
dqhx99i
<|soss|><|sot|>JSON.stringify(new Set([1, 2, 3])) === '{}'<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|sor|>Yes? The argument is not stored as exposed properties on the object. `JSON.stringify`only handles exposed properties. This'll work just fine: JSON.stringify(Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3]))) Although, it changes the contents form an object to an array. Not a loljs. Just /r/shittyprogramming<|eor|><|sor|>Yes, simply accepting everything under the sun and silently serializing it as an empty object instead of raising an error is very much a loljs. The fact that this loosey typey approach is burned into the language and can't easily be unfucked is an even bigger loljs.<|eor|><|sor|>I couldn't disagree more. :) You cannot expect any object - native or otherwise - to be serializable. The interface of `Set` is utilized incorrectly in the example in the topic. The language does exactly what it should and as one should expect. There's no quirkiness going on. It's completely reliable. It's not a loljs.<|eor|><|sor|>> You cannot expect any object - native or otherwise - to be serializable. That could well be the title of another /r/loljs post, with your comment as the end of the link. <|eor|><|sor|>It's true. Circular patterns/recursion will cause `JSON.stringify` to throw an error. And no object, which hasn't specifically disabled extension/injection, is protected from outside intervention. Consider this example: var error = new Error("foo"); error.self = error; JSON.stringify(error); This'll result in the error: Uncaught TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON Also, /r/loljs is about illogical, quirky, counter-intuitive, or even funny things in the Javascript programming language. A plentiful palette. It's not about how some programmer incorrectly utilizes an object's interface.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
Nwallins
jfjrbo
<|sols|><|sot|>Just wait till you see what it costs to use functional syntax sugar instead of for loops everywhere!<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jf6by8/using_constlet_instead_of_var_can_make_javascript/g9ijb1z/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
14
loljs
hurenkind5
4itedk
<|sols|><|sot|>What could go wrong?<|eot|><|sol|>https://reaktor.com/blog/node-js-satellite-means-anyone-can-space-programmer/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
14
loljs
Michal_Perlakowski
6c6b5p
<|sols|><|sot|>Spread operator magically turns functions into 'not functions'<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/q/44071673/3853934<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
mort96
dhsbiyx
<|sols|><|sot|>Spread operator magically turns functions into 'not functions'<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/q/44071673/3853934<|eol|><|sor|>The problem here seems to be that the double function returns a number, and he's trying to apply the spread operator to the result of calling the function. The spread operator obviously doesn't work on numbers. The loljs is that the error message OP got was weird and misleading, though others are reporting to get more sane errors.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
MazeChaZer
573r25
<|sols|><|sot|>npm can't into sensible lock file handling and --save by default, now Facebook rewrites the whole thing from scratch<|eot|><|sol|>https://code.facebook.com/posts/1840075619545360/yarn-a-new-package-manager-for-javascript/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
mort96
d8pfhil
<|sols|><|sot|>npm can't into sensible lock file handling and --save by default, now Facebook rewrites the whole thing from scratch<|eot|><|sol|>https://code.facebook.com/posts/1840075619545360/yarn-a-new-package-manager-for-javascript/<|eol|><|sor|>So why does Facebook have to check in node_modules into the repo? It sounds like they're trying to solve a problem that is ultimately because they're using npm not as it's intended.<|eor|><|sor|>From the article: > Initially, following the prescribed best practices, we only checked in package.json and asked engineers to manually run npm install. This worked well enough for engineers, but broke down in our continuous integration environments, which need to be sandboxed and cut off from the internet for security and reliability reasons.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
getlaidanddie
37gder
<|soss|><|sot|>var a = Object.create(null)<|eot|><|sost|> typeof a // --> "object" a instanceof Object // --> false<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
00Davo
ctwemd5
<|soss|><|sot|>var a = Object.create(null)<|eot|><|sost|> typeof a // --> "object" a instanceof Object // --> false<|eost|><|sor|>This is totally unsurprising behaviour? `Object.create(null)` produces a new object which doesn't extend from anything, whereas `{}` produces a new object that extends from `Object`. That's the *point* of `Object.create(null)`.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
xiata
75rolf
<|sols|><|sot|>Chrome: Array.prototype.sort() uses an unstable sort algorithm unlike Edge, Firefox, or Safari<|eot|><|sol|>https://jsfiddle.net/L2r2dLek/3/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
12
loljs
Silly-Freak
dmv0u9
<|sols|><|sot|>async/await is new, why give it PHP-style coercion semantics?<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/tchk2xoqonu31.jpg<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
12
loljs
throbbaway
ctyrur
<|soss|><|sot|>I've been trying to become acquainted with "modern" JS today...<|eot|><|sost|>Did you know these three functions do 3 distinct things? &#x200B; let changeName1 = newName => ( { name: newName } ) let changeName2 = newName => { { name: newName } } let changeName3 = newName => { name: newName } &#x200B; Can you tell how?<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
1kGarand
22qodc
<|soss|><|sot|>++[[]][+[]]+[+[]] === "10"<|eot|><|sost|>from a reddit comment. I wish I could find it again for proper credit.<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
Takeoded
qn8fhu
<|soss|><|sot|>ele.children.length=0 , ele.firstChild = Text node<|eot|><|sost|>running this on reddit, ele=document.getElementsByTagName("span")[0]; ele.children; // empty HTMLCollection[] ele.children.length; // 0 it evidently has no children, ok.. quoting [mdn on firstChild](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Node/firstChild): > The Node.firstChild read-only property returns the node's first child in the tree, or null if the node has no children. ok, so ele.firstChild should be null then, ele.firstChild; // Text node ele.firstChild.toString(); // '[object Text]' ele.firstChild.nodeValue; // 'Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts' wtf js? it has no children, except firstChild, but firsChild doesn't count..<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
SoInsightful
hjioyzx
<|soss|><|sot|>ele.children.length=0 , ele.firstChild = Text node<|eot|><|sost|>running this on reddit, ele=document.getElementsByTagName("span")[0]; ele.children; // empty HTMLCollection[] ele.children.length; // 0 it evidently has no children, ok.. quoting [mdn on firstChild](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Node/firstChild): > The Node.firstChild read-only property returns the node's first child in the tree, or null if the node has no children. ok, so ele.firstChild should be null then, ele.firstChild; // Text node ele.firstChild.toString(); // '[object Text]' ele.firstChild.nodeValue; // 'Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts' wtf js? it has no children, except firstChild, but firsChild doesn't count..<|eost|><|sor|>There's no good logic behind it, but `.firstChild` refers to `.childNodes`, which includes text and comment nodes, not `.children`, which for some reason only includes elements.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
SSPmrsomebody1
8lhzyk
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
Nulagrithom
dzgam7q
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>Does js compare arrays by checking each element? It might be that you are allocating two empty arrays and comparing their pointers. As for the iteration thing I have no clue.<|eor|><|sor|>That's exactly what's happening. References aren't the same, therefore the arrays aren't the same. Pretty sure this would happen in a lot of languages.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
19
loljs
Earhacker
dzh1gzt
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>Does js compare arrays by checking each element? It might be that you are allocating two empty arrays and comparing their pointers. As for the iteration thing I have no clue.<|eor|><|sor|>That's exactly what's happening. References aren't the same, therefore the arrays aren't the same. Pretty sure this would happen in a lot of languages.<|eor|><|sor|>Ruby: irb(main):001:0> [] == [] => true irb(main):002:0> [] === [] => true `==` checks equality of value, `===` has a [really weird behaviour](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3422223/vs-in-ruby) in Ruby. Python: >>> [] == [] True >>> [] is [] False `==` checks equality, `is` checks identity, i.e. the two objects are the same reference in memory JavaScript: > [] == [] false > [] === [] false `==` checks for equality of value, `===` checks for equality of value and type. But unlike Ruby and Python, arrays are not a type in JavaScript: Ruby: irb(main):002:0> [].class => Array Python: >>> type([]) <class 'list'> JavaScript: > typeof [] 'object' ...they're just objects. So in JavaScript you're comparing two empty *objects* with no defined equality method. And since the two objects occupy different addresses in memory, they are not equal. This behaviour, with bare objects, is identical to how Ruby and Python behave: Ruby: irb(main):003:0> Object.new == Object.new => false irb(main):004:0> Object.new === Object.new => false Python: >>> object() == object() False >>> object() is object() False<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
Pstuc002
dzftjna
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>Does js compare arrays by checking each element? It might be that you are allocating two empty arrays and comparing their pointers. As for the iteration thing I have no clue.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
Kazumz
dzhpn91
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>This seems to be entirely valid because they are different references. Feel free to correct me.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
Nulagrithom
dzha1gu
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>Does js compare arrays by checking each element? It might be that you are allocating two empty arrays and comparing their pointers. As for the iteration thing I have no clue.<|eor|><|sor|>That's exactly what's happening. References aren't the same, therefore the arrays aren't the same. Pretty sure this would happen in a lot of languages.<|eor|><|sor|>Ruby: irb(main):001:0> [] == [] => true irb(main):002:0> [] === [] => true `==` checks equality of value, `===` has a [really weird behaviour](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3422223/vs-in-ruby) in Ruby. Python: >>> [] == [] True >>> [] is [] False `==` checks equality, `is` checks identity, i.e. the two objects are the same reference in memory JavaScript: > [] == [] false > [] === [] false `==` checks for equality of value, `===` checks for equality of value and type. But unlike Ruby and Python, arrays are not a type in JavaScript: Ruby: irb(main):002:0> [].class => Array Python: >>> type([]) <class 'list'> JavaScript: > typeof [] 'object' ...they're just objects. So in JavaScript you're comparing two empty *objects* with no defined equality method. And since the two objects occupy different addresses in memory, they are not equal. This behaviour, with bare objects, is identical to how Ruby and Python behave: Ruby: irb(main):003:0> Object.new == Object.new => false irb(main):004:0> Object.new === Object.new => false Python: >>> object() == object() False >>> object() is object() False<|eor|><|sor|>Interesting. What happens when you do the JS equivalent of `[{}] === [{}]` in Ruby and Python?<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
Earhacker
dzhoo3p
<|soss|><|sot|>[]==[] and []===[] return false.<|eot|><|sost|>...Also when I concantenate these two HTMLCollections their "length" value is iterated through so I get a TypeError when my iteration tries to treat the length integer like an HTML element. I thought programming/scripting languages were supposed to be logical! btw I found this subreddit because I once came across /r/lolphp while being pissed off at PHP's nonexistent stack trace (fixed by using debug_backtrace()) and I replaced the "php" with "js".<|eost|><|sor|>Does js compare arrays by checking each element? It might be that you are allocating two empty arrays and comparing their pointers. As for the iteration thing I have no clue.<|eor|><|sor|>That's exactly what's happening. References aren't the same, therefore the arrays aren't the same. Pretty sure this would happen in a lot of languages.<|eor|><|sor|>Ruby: irb(main):001:0> [] == [] => true irb(main):002:0> [] === [] => true `==` checks equality of value, `===` has a [really weird behaviour](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3422223/vs-in-ruby) in Ruby. Python: >>> [] == [] True >>> [] is [] False `==` checks equality, `is` checks identity, i.e. the two objects are the same reference in memory JavaScript: > [] == [] false > [] === [] false `==` checks for equality of value, `===` checks for equality of value and type. But unlike Ruby and Python, arrays are not a type in JavaScript: Ruby: irb(main):002:0> [].class => Array Python: >>> type([]) <class 'list'> JavaScript: > typeof [] 'object' ...they're just objects. So in JavaScript you're comparing two empty *objects* with no defined equality method. And since the two objects occupy different addresses in memory, they are not equal. This behaviour, with bare objects, is identical to how Ruby and Python behave: Ruby: irb(main):003:0> Object.new == Object.new => false irb(main):004:0> Object.new === Object.new => false Python: >>> object() == object() False >>> object() is object() False<|eor|><|sor|>Interesting. What happens when you do the JS equivalent of `[{}] === [{}]` in Ruby and Python?<|eor|><|sor|>False across the board. Ruby: irb(main):005:0> [Object.new] == [Object.new] => false irb(main):006:0> [Object.new] === [Object.new] => false Python: >>> [object()] == [object()] False >>> [object()] is [object()] False JavaScript: > [{}] == [{}] false > [{}] === [{}] false Ruby and Python both see an array containing *the same* empty object as equivalent, but JavaScript doesn't. Ruby: irb(main):007:0> empty = Object.new => #<Object:0x007f8309a3b090> irb(main):008:0> [empty] == [empty] => true irb(main):009:0> [empty] === [empty] => true Python: >>> empty = object() >>> [empty] == [empty] True >>> [empty] is [empty] False \(the objects are the same, but the lists are not\) JavaScript: > empty = {} {} > empty == empty true > [empty] == [empty] false > [empty] === [empty] false \(the variable `empty` is the same as itself, but we already know that JS arrays which contain equal objects are not themselves equal, because the arrays are just objects and not really arrays\)<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
lhgaghl
1xoenm
<|sols|><|sot|>JSt world problems<|eot|><|sol|>http://fifod.com/why-you-should-always-use-and-other-bad-practices/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
1114111
71859r
<|soss|><|sot|>Array.from({lol: "js"}) returns empty array<|eot|><|sost|>Converting non-iterable objects (or numbers) to arrays using `Array.from` silently returns an empty array. That is, of course, unless you pass something like undefined or null. Then you get the descriptive error `TypeError: V is null` (Firefox, not really a loljs). Forgot to define `Symbol.iterator` on your makeshift iterator to return itself? Don't even think about getting any error messages like you do with `for-of`. `Array.from` just gives you an empty array and confusion. Hell, javascript technically [doesn't even require](http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/#sec-iterator-interface) iterators to define `Symbol.iterator` [like Python does for `__iter__`](https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#typeiter). Searching around, several js libraries meant to remedy the absent standard library support for working with iterators don't bother with `Symbol.iterator` when creating or working with iterators. Anyway, not really a surprise when it comes to js I guess. Raising an error for null and silently doing the wrong thing for other bad values is a classic javascript tactic to keep you on your toes. Still, never heard anyone complain about this particular function before, and it annoyed me, so I thought I'd share.<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
samdroid_
697ctq
<|sols|><|sot|>Arithmetic with JavaScript Arrays<|eot|><|sol|>https://learntemail.sam.today/blog/arithmetic-with-javascript-arrays/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
BillOReillyYUPokeMe
4ipm6b
<|soss|><|sot|>~!!"0"[+'hello']+'2.99';<|eot|><|sost|>> "-12.99" What the fuck?<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
11
loljs
eof
1pln77
<|soss|><|sot|>javascript sorts arrays lexographically by default<|eot|><|sost|> >a = [1.2, 8.8, 11.4] [1.2, 8.8, 11.4] >a.sort() [1.2, 11.4, 8.8] <|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
Takeoded
eebe2l
<|soss|><|sot|>decodeURIComponent()<|eot|><|sost|> > decodeURIComponent() < "undefined" yup, the decoded version of absolutely nothing is string literal `"undefined"` for comparison, here's what PHP does: $ php -r 'var_dump(urldecode());' PHP Warning: urldecode() expects exactly 1 parameter, 0 given in Command line code on line 1 NULL<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
the_alias_of_andrea
fbt17m4
<|soss|><|sot|>decodeURIComponent()<|eot|><|sost|> > decodeURIComponent() < "undefined" yup, the decoded version of absolutely nothing is string literal `"undefined"` for comparison, here's what PHP does: $ php -r 'var_dump(urldecode());' PHP Warning: urldecode() expects exactly 1 parameter, 0 given in Command line code on line 1 NULL<|eost|><|soopr|>decodeURI() and encodeURI() and encodeURIComponent() is also affected. but what should have happened? i'm a bit conflicted, arguably an empty string is an accurate url-encoded representation of nothing, so returning an empty string would have been appropriate. but doing something like TypeError: decodeURI requires 1 argument, but only 0 were passed would also make sense (example from https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Errors/More_arguments_needed ) but returning String("undefined") is definitely not the right thing to do.<|eoopr|><|sor|>Isn't this standard behaviour in JavaScript: functions accepting strings will convert implicitly to string, and undefined's implicit string conversion is `"undefined"`?<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
jonnyburger
5pxikb
<|soss|><|sot|>let r = /abc/g; console.log(r.test('abc'), r.test('abc')); // true false<|eot|><|sost|> const REGEX = /abc/g REGEX.test('abc'); > true REGEX.test('abc')); > false <|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
z500
dcum15j
<|soss|><|sot|>let r = /abc/g; console.log(r.test('abc'), r.test('abc')); // true false<|eot|><|sost|> const REGEX = /abc/g REGEX.test('abc'); > true REGEX.test('abc')); > false <|eost|><|sor|>The first call to `test` advances `REGEX.lastIndex` to 3, the length of the matched string. The second call to `test` attempts to match the regex to the part remaining after the last match, which is "". https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/RegExp/lastIndex<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
phvcky
dcvnk7s
<|soss|><|sot|>let r = /abc/g; console.log(r.test('abc'), r.test('abc')); // true false<|eot|><|sost|> const REGEX = /abc/g REGEX.test('abc'); > true REGEX.test('abc')); > false <|eost|><|sor|>As /u/z500 correctly pointed out, this is intended behavior. Remove the global flag or reset `r.lastIndex = 0`. Shitpost.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
13
loljs
sheldonkreger
3fnshq
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.JS "best practices" . . . or a long list of reasons why JS is poorly suited for async operations?<|eot|><|sol|>http://justbuildsomething.com/node-js-best-practices/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
BowserKoopa
ctrcbba
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.JS "best practices" . . . or a long list of reasons why JS is poorly suited for async operations?<|eot|><|sol|>http://justbuildsomething.com/node-js-best-practices/<|eol|><|sor|>Can be replaced with > 1. Don't write in JavaScript<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
10
loljs
Banane9
cw7lgwm
<|sols|><|sot|>Node.JS "best practices" . . . or a long list of reasons why JS is poorly suited for async operations?<|eot|><|sol|>http://justbuildsomething.com/node-js-best-practices/<|eol|><|sor|>> When this happens the server would effectively be inaccessible for 30 minutes as that module is loaded. If this happens at peak hours several users would be unable to get any access to your server and requests will queue up. Well, someone isn't expecting a lot of traffic...<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
monitorius1
88dqxh
<|sols|><|sot|>This is from latest is-odd library debate<|eot|><|sol|>http://rextester.com/EYLHR12670<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
Vortico
dwjwgft
<|sols|><|sot|>This is from latest is-odd library debate<|eot|><|sol|>http://rextester.com/EYLHR12670<|eol|><|sor|>This isn't realy loljs material because it is well-known that the 'number' JS type is an IEEE 754 double.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
11
loljs
loljs
2aztvm
<|sols|><|sot|>JavaScript Jeopardy<|eot|><|sol|>https://twitter.com/jsjeopardy<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
Takeoded
68bfi0
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
4
loljs
arilotter
dgx6i1f
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Isn't this just an IEEE floating point problem that would happen in any language without a data type large enough to store the number? Of course, ideally it would throw a warning if you made a number that can't be well represented or something, but you can hardly fault JS for floating point problems like this <|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
20
loljs
Drainedsoul
dgx93gs
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Not a quirk of Javascript, but a quirk of the fact that you can't represent arbitrarily large numbers with floating point.<|eor|><|sor|>And JavaScript doesn't have integers which kind of brings it back to being a quirk of JavaScript. <|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
20
loljs
ConcernedInScythe
dgzr7x0
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Isn't this just an IEEE floating point problem that would happen in any language without a data type large enough to store the number? Of course, ideally it would throw a warning if you made a number that can't be well represented or something, but you can hardly fault JS for floating point problems like this <|eor|><|sor|>You can absolutely blame JS for deciding that using doubles as the only numerical type was a good idea.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
18
loljs
Vortico
dgx9vby
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Not a quirk of Javascript, but a quirk of the fact that you can't represent arbitrarily large numbers with floating point.<|eor|><|sor|>And JavaScript doesn't have integers which kind of brings it back to being a quirk of JavaScript. <|eor|><|sor|>Okay, sure, but then the title should be "Javascript uses double precision floats for all number types" instead of this, but everyone knows that already.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
9
loljs
Vortico
dgx9xry
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Isn't this just an IEEE floating point problem that would happen in any language without a data type large enough to store the number? Of course, ideally it would throw a warning if you made a number that can't be well represented or something, but you can hardly fault JS for floating point problems like this <|eor|><|soopr|>at the very least, i blame it for not throwing a parsing error in strict mode<|eoopr|><|sor|>No, because typing things like 1267650600228229401496703205376 should be perfectly valid since it can be represented exactly as a float.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
Takeoded
dgx6ojd
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Isn't this just an IEEE floating point problem that would happen in any language without a data type large enough to store the number? Of course, ideally it would throw a warning if you made a number that can't be well represented or something, but you can hardly fault JS for floating point problems like this <|eor|><|soopr|>at the very least, i blame it for not throwing a parsing error in strict mode<|eoopr|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
Vortico
dgx6q8l
<|soss|><|sot|>big numbers are equal<|eot|><|sost|> >100000000000000000==99999999999999999 <true the scary part, === doesn't even notice this >100000000000000000===99999999999999999 <true and if you try a string: >100000000000000000=="99999999999999999" <true but at least, it notices that 1 is a string and the other a number: >100000000000000000==="99999999999999999" <false finally! some sanity and in case you wonder, "use strict" makes no difference.<|eost|><|sor|>Not a quirk of Javascript, but a quirk of the fact that you can't represent arbitrarily large numbers with floating point.<|eor|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
6
loljs
MarkyC4A
50usqc
<|sols|><|sot|>Adding an Object in an Object creates a key based on the variable name<|eot|><|sol|>https://jsfiddle.net/ame8g6kv/1/<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
amirmikhak
d77iybx
<|sols|><|sot|>Adding an Object in an Object creates a key based on the variable name<|eot|><|sol|>https://jsfiddle.net/ame8g6kv/1/<|eol|><|sor|>I'm honestly not sure what you think should happen here... I believe that this is a result of ES6 object shorthand syntax. Without a `:` after each key, the key for that entry becomes the value, as a string. For example, `{foo}` is the same as `{foo: foo}`. If foo were a variable with value `"bar"`, the object would be `{foo: "bar"}` in both cases.<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
7
loljs
lukaseder
2bugrg
<|sols|><|sot|>Defeating infinity: parseInt(1 / 0, 19) == 18<|eot|><|sol|>http://www.ctmmc.net/defeating-infinity<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
5
loljs
phoborsh
eoaxb9
<|sols|><|sot|>Does this nightmare of a language always execute things in the wrong order?<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/1z1ctphv8ma41.jpg<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
4
loljs
ipe369
feb18zk
<|sols|><|sot|>Does this nightmare of a language always execute things in the wrong order?<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/1z1ctphv8ma41.jpg<|eol|><|sor|>Does the function have async calls? 'cause that's just a language feature, not just js being dumb Maybe the problem is you just don't know how to program in the language<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
11
loljs
drumskirun
fecgz5s
<|sols|><|sot|>Does this nightmare of a language always execute things in the wrong order?<|eot|><|sol|>https://i.redd.it/1z1ctphv8ma41.jpg<|eol|><|sor|>First, console.out is not a function, console.log is. If you're this new to the language then you have some reading up to do on the Event Loop. https://stackoverflow.com/q/49563818/6567214 Secondly, the behavior of console.log is dependant on the runtime, it's *not* a standardized part of the language. https://stackoverflow.com/q/23392111/6567214<|eor|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
8
loljs
Takeoded
6mqoh9
<|sols|><|sot|>What the... JavaScript? - Kyle Simpsons<|eot|><|sol|>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pL28CcEijU<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
4
loljs
sheldonkreger
3imwgu
<|sols|><|sot|>Simply trying to figure out the type of a variable returned from an API call. I guess it's really hard.<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7390426/better-way-to-get-type-of-a-javascript-variable<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
3
loljs
Banane9
2mlr23
<|sols|><|sot|>There second argument in substring and substr has different meanings<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3745515/what-is-the-difference-between-substr-and-substring<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
4
loljs
nalldom
1hqs08
<|sols|><|sot|>So I was debugging my validation since 4 hours...<|eot|><|sol|>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/894696/why-is-the-javascript-regexp-test-method-behaving-as-a-toggle<|eol|><|eols|><|endoftext|>
3
loljs
lukaseder
2d4t2u
<|soss|><|sot|>Hold your horses! ['10','10','10','10'].map(parseInt) yields [10, NaN, 2, 3]<|eot|><|sost|><|eost|><|eoss|><|endoftext|>
0