• merthyr1831@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 hours ago

    of there was proof that chickens could contribute to the Ecmascript standard I would probably stop being vegan tbf

  • devilish666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Every programming language has it’s own weakness but we still learned it and pretend it will never happened to us.
    Moral of the story : JUST LEARN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE THAT CAN MAKE YOU MORE MONEY NOT THE ONE YOU LIKE, BECAUSE YOU NEED MONEY

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    If a chicken could code, it would probably work like JavaScript. This is accurate.

    When I had a flock, for example, sometimes one would flip over a bucket onto itself and then decide it must be night and go to sleep.

  • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I’ve been programming in typescript recently, and can I say. I fucking hate JavaScript and typescript. It’s such a pain so much odd behaviors.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I like custom types and them being able to follow custom interfaces; it makes for great type safety that almost no other language can guarantee!

      What I’m saying is I’m learning Rust.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Lol name one outside of it’s well known equality rules that linters check for.

      Also, name the language you think is better.

      Because for those of us who have coded in languages that are actually bad, hearing people complain about triple equals signs for the millionth time seems pretty lame.

      • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Recently I encountered an issue with “casting”. I had a class “foo” and a class “bar” that extended class foo. I made a list of class “foo” and added “bar” objects to the list. But when I tried use objects from “foo” list and cast them to bar and attempted to use a “bar” member function I got a runtime error saying it didn’t exists maybe this was user error but it doesn’t align with what I come to expect from languages.

        I just feel like instead of slapping some silly abstraction on a language we should actually work on integrating a proper type safe language in its stead.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              12 hours ago

              K, well configure your linter the way a professional Typescript environment should have it configured, and it will be there too. Not to be rude but not having a linter configured and running is a pretty basic issue. If you configured your project with Vite or any other framework it would have this configured OOTB.

              • Füsilier Breitlinger@infosec.exchange
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                12 hours ago

                @masterspace

                Not to be rude but not having a linter configured and running is a pretty basic issue.

                Yeah, if you’re a C programmer in the 1980s, maybe. But it’s 2006 now and compilers are able to do basic sanity checks all on their own.

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  Interpreted languages don’t have compilers, and one of the steps that compilers do is LINTING. You’re literally complaining about not configuring your compiler properly and blaming it on the language.

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Honestly the meme of ‘JavaScript bad’ is so tired and outdated it’s ridiculous. It made sense 14 years ago before invention of Typescript and ES5/6+, but these days it basically just shows ignorance or the blind regurgitation of a decade old meme.

    Typescript is hands down the most pleasant language to work in, followed closely by the more modern compiled ones like Go, Swift, C#, and miles ahead of widely used legacy ones like Java, and PHP etc. and the white space, untyped, nightmare that is python.

    I’m like 99% sure that it’s just because JavaScript / Typescript is so common that for anyone who doesn’t start with it, it’s the second language they learn, and at that point they’re just whiny and butthurt about learning a new language.

    • Zangoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      12 hours ago

      As a TypeScript dev, TypeScript is not pleasant to work with at all. I don’t love Java or C# but I’d take them any day of the week over anything JS-based. TypeScript provides the illusion of type safety without actually providing full type safety because of one random library whose functionality you depend on that returns and takes in any instead of using generic types. Unlike pretty much any other statically typed language, compiled TypeScript will do nothing to ensure typing at runtime, and won’t error at all if something else gets passed in until you try to use a method or field that it doesn’t have. It will just fail silently unless you add type checking to your functions/methods that are already annotated as taking in your desired types. Languages like Java and C# would throw an exception immediately when you try to cast the value, and languages like Rust and Go wouldn’t even compile unless you either handle the case or panic at that exact location. Pretty much the only language that handles this worse is Python (and maybe Lua? I don’t really know much about Lua though).

      TLDR; TypeScript in theory is very different from TypeScript in practice and that difference makes it very annoying to use.

      Bonus meme:

      • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I have next to no experience with TypeScript, but want to make a case in defence of Python: Python does not pretend to have any kind of type safety, and more or less actively encourages duck typing.

        Now, you can like or dislike duck typing, but for the kind of quick and dirty scripting or proof of concept prototyping that I think Python excels at, duck typing can help you get the job done much more efficiently.

        In my opinion, it’s much more frustrating to work with a language that pretends to be type safe while not being so.

        Because of this, I regularly turn off the type checking on my python linter, because it’s throwing warnings about “invalid types”, due to incomplete or outdated docs, when I know for a fact that the function in question works with whatever type I’m giving it. There is really no such thing as an “invalid type” in Python, because it’s a language that does not intend to be type-safe.

        • Zangoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          That’s entirely fair for the usecase of a small script or plugin, or even a small website. I’d quickly get annoyed with Python if I had to use it for a larger project though.

          TypeScript breaks down when you need it for a codebase that’s longer than a few thousand lines of code. I use pure JavaScript in my personal website and it’s not that bad. At work where the frontend I work on has 20,000 lines of TypeScript not including the HTML files, it’s a massive headache.

          • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I wholeheartedly agree: In my job, I develop mathematical models which are implemented in Fortran/C/C++, but all the models have a Python interface. In practice, we use Python as a “front end”. That is: when running the models to generate plots or tables, or whatever, that is done through Python, because plotting and file handling is quick and easy in Python.

            I also do quite a bit of prototyping in Python, where I quickly want to throw something together to check if the general concept works.

            We had one model that was actually implemented in Python, and it took less than a year before it was re-implemented in C++, because nobody other than the original dev could really use it or maintain it. It became painfully clear how much of a burden python can be once you have a code base over a certain size.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Pretty much the only language that handles this worse is Python (and maybe Lua? I don’t really know much about Lua though).

        This is the case for literally all interpreted languages, and is an inherent part of them being interpreted.

        However, while I recognize that can happen, I’ve literally never come across it in my time working on Typescript. I’m not sure what third party libraries you’re relying on but the most popular OAuth libraries, ORMs, frontend component libraries, state management libraries, graphing libraries, etc. are all written in pure Typescript these days.

        • Zangoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          This is the case for literally all interpreted languages, and is an inherent part of them being interpreted.

          It’s actually the opposite. The idea of “types” is almost entirely made up by compilers and runtime environments (including interpreters). The only thing assembly instructions actually care about is how many bits a binary value has and whether or not it should be stored as a floating point, integer, or pointer (I’m oversimplifying here but the point still stands). Assembly instructions only care about the data in the registers (or an address in memory) that they operate on.

          There is no part of an interpreted language that requires it to not have any type-checking. In fact, many languages use runtime environments for better runtime type diagnostics (e.g. Java and C#) that couldn’t be enforced at runtime in a purely compiled language like C or C++. Purely compiled binaries are pretty much the only environments where automatic runtime type checking can’t be added without basically recreating a runtime environment in the binary (like what languages like go do). The only interpreter that can’t have type-checking is your physical CPU.

          If you meant that it is inherent to the language in that it was intended, you could make the case that for smaller-scale languages like bash, Lua, and some cases Python, that the dynamic typing makes it better. Working with large, complex frontends is not one of those cases. Even if this was an intentional feature of JavaScript, the existence of TypeScript at all proves it was a bad one.

          However, while I recognize that can happen, I’ve literally never come across it in my time working on Typescript. I’m not sure what third party libraries you’re relying on but the most popular OAuth libraries, ORMs, frontend component libraries, state management libraries, graphing libraries, etc. are all written in pure Typescript these days.

          This next example doesn’t directly return any, but is more ubiquitous than the admittedly niche libraries the code I work on depends on: Many HTTP request services in TypeScript will fill fields in as undefined if they’re missing, even if the typing shouldn’t allow for that because that type requirement doesn’t actually exist at runtime. Languages like Kotlin, C#, and Rust would all error because the deserialization failed when something that shouldn’t be considered nullable had an empty value. Java might also have options for this depending on the serialization library used.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Nothing says language of the year better than a language that needs to be compiled to an inefficient interpreted language made for browsers and then grossly stuffed into a stripped out Chrome engine to serve as backend. All filled with thousands of dependencies badly managed through npm to overcome the lack of a standard library actually useful for backend stuff.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        Oh I’m sorry, I was waiting for you to name a more successful cross platform development language and framework?

        Oh, you’re listing Java, and Xamarin, and otherwise rewriting the same app 4 times? Cool beans bro. Great resourcing choices you’ve made.

        All filled with thousands of dependencies badly managed through npm to overcome the lack of a standard library actually useful for backend stuff.

        Bruh, this is the dumbest fucking complaint. “Open source language relies on open source packages, OMG WHAT?!?!!”

        Please do go ahead and show me the OOTB OAuth library that comes with your backend language of choice, or kindly stfu about everything you need being provided by the language and not by third party libraries.

    • GreenAppleTree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Typescript is hands down the most pleasant language to work in

      Agreed. But doesn’t make “JavaScript bad” any less true…

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I would somewhat disagree. These days virtually every popular library on npm is pure typescript and every new project I see at a company is pure typescript, with only legacy migrations of old systems still mixing the two.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          I’m not involved enough to really comment on that, but it’s not a 14 year old joke as much as a 1 or 2 year old joke if so.

          Glad to hear it’s taking off. Hopefully browsers migrate to supporting it natively and depreciating JavaScript next.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      Look at those butthurt downvotes, haha. Currently 2 - 4.

      Let me reach around mine to give you an upvote.

  • ReadMoreBooks
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Our mass media can incite fear of chickens, pigs, and cattle. Then their existence itself can be defined as a terrorist act. We’ll redefine vegan to mean only those that eat terrorists to save the other animals. Actual vegans can call themselves “vegetablers”. Nothing changes and everyone feels good because if they don’t feel good then they’re not human.

    • rbn@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      If the existence is a terroristic act how do you call farmers who breed these creatures on purpose? I guess the new ‘vegans’ could then eat the very last generation of terroristic animals and then everyone needs to go ‘vegetabler’. I guess that doesn’t sound too bad to those that are vegetabler on purpose. ;)

      • ReadMoreBooks
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        If the existence is a terroristic act how do you call farmers who breed these creatures on purpose?

        Capitalists.