What makes JavaScript so widely disliked? I know very little of it, and in skimming different stuff I think I've seen like a million different frameworks for it, so is that a part of it?
It was mostly made for simple scripts to embed on a website for animations and handling updates without refreshing whole page. Not to make a full portable client (browser) side app.
Hating JavaScript is mostly a meme, it's just a programming language. But its very loose syntax, fact it's often someone's first programming language to learn and how most programs written in it nowadays are a hack build on top of a hack on top a hack makes this language easy to laugh at.
Accurate. LaTeX is great, it makes you feel like you have superpowers compared to "office suite"-style software. But every once in a while you just run into some bullshit that feels like it's stuck in 1985 and it completely breaks your flow. I remember wanting to make a longtable where text in the "date" column would be rotated by 90 degrees to leave more horizontal room for the other columns. It took me two rotateboxes, a phantom, a vspace, a hspace and 40 minutes of my life to get the alignment right. Would probably have taken a duckduckgo search and three clicks in Libreoffice.
I still have no idea how to exit the build process. It tells I need to type H or \end but it also just lies. I find the easiest way is to invoke Ctrl-Z and then kill the background process, and the younglings children
Funnily enough I had a similar problem but I wanted text instead of a date. In the end I used a solution similar to yours and adjusted each cell entry manually for hours. Feels like there should be a lot simpler solution for this problem in LaTeX. Glad I don't need to use it anymore...
Eh, your statement is accurate for PHP4 and still relevant up to PHP5.2... We're on PHP8.3 now and PHP8.0 is now out of security updates. I know it's trend to hate on PHP but you've got to at least update your materials to var-vars... it's like knocking node for having substr() and substring().
2 years ago I tried to give a drupal project the ci/cd makeover (i.e. containers, test-deployments, reproducable builds, etc)... that's when my hate was freshly renewed.
At this point I think it's ok to let a dead language die and move on to something else (anything else, really)
That one is not that complicated if you don't think about the math. It's basically just if we interpret the float as int and add a magic number we have a good estimation.
From what I remember at least, it's been a little while since I implemented it.
Over the top tone: "Pretty sure that won't compile. $EVAL_ERROR modulo what you get from the filehandle called = isn't an lvalue that can be put through the Goatse operator that I'm aware of."
But seriously(?), I'm almost certain that's not how that would be parsed. = isn't a valid bareword, so Perl would choke on the spaceship operator not being a term... I think.
After testing... It's worse. I think it's parsing <> as the glob operator and = as a filespec.
For those who don't know Perl:
Because of its appearance, <=> really is called the spaceship operator (at least, when it can be parsed as an operator and not whatever happened above).
=()= by comparison has unofficially been called Goatse. If you don't know what Goatse is, find out at your own risk. If you do know, you can see why this particular pseudo-operator was given that name.
And if you're still reading, =()= is a pseudo-operator because it's not actually parsed as part of the syntax. It's literally an assignment operator = followed by an empty list () followed by another assignment operator =, providing list context to the outside of the equals signs that wouldn't otherwise be there.
[Why are you still still reading?] Context is important in Perl. If a function returns a list of values (which is something Perl functions can do) and you try to store the result in a scalar variable, replacing the usual = with =()= will store the number of elements returned rather than the last element of the list.
I personally never understood how anyone could find Perl appealing or even "good" to program in, probably because I could never understand wtf the code was meant to do
I don't know why, but I still can't open a core file without going I'm in. I don't do QA, though, and so tinkering with final breath of my program frozen in time maintains some novelty.
Idk I still like writing my own stuff purely pythonic when I can. Pythons syntax is the most “fun” and “natural” for me so I find it fun. Like doin a sudoku puzzle
That's true of basically all problems you deal with in programming. Unless you're truly bleeding edge you're working on a solved problem. It'll be novel enough that you can't out-of-the-box it but you can definitely use the tools and paths everyone else has put together.
Part of why I like kotlin as a language. It has so many tools built right in.
I was mainly thinking about how so many Rust projects advertise very loudly that they're written in Rust. Like, they would have -rs in the name, or "in Rust" as part of their one-line description. You rarely see this kind of enthusiasms for the the language in other languages. Not a bad thing by the way! And also there's the "rewrite it in rust" meme, where people seem to take perfectly functional projects and port them to Rust (again, not a bad thing! Strength in diversity!)
So many solver solutions that day, either Z3 or Gauss-Jordan lol. I got a little obsessed about doing it without solvers or (god forbid) manually solving the system and eventually found a relatively simple way to find the intersection with just lines and planes:
Translate all hailstones and their velocities to a reference frame in which one stone is stationary at 0,0,0 (origin).
Take another arbitrary hailstone (A) and cross its (rereferenced) velocity and position vectors. This gives the normal vector of a plane containing the origin and the trajectory of A, both of which the thrown stone must intersect. So, the trajectory of the thrown stone lies in that plane somewhere.
Take two more arbitrary hailstones B and C and find the points and times that they intersect the plane. The thrown stone must strike B and C at those points, so those points are coordinates on the line representing the thrown stone. The velocity of the thrown stone is calculated by dividing the displacement between the two points by the difference of the time points of the intersections.
Use the velocity of the thrown stone and the time and position info the intersection of B or C to determine the position of the thrown stone at t = 0
Translate that position and velocity back to the original reference frame.
It's a suboptimal solution in that it uses 4 hailstones instead of the theoretical minimum of 3, but was a lot easier to wrap my head around. Incidentally, it is not too hard to adapt the above algorithm to not need C (i.e., to use only 3 hailstones) by using line intersections. Such a solution is not much more complicated than what I gave and still has a simple geometric interpretation, but I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader :)
I’ve seen this before but don’t accept it myself. There are cases where you just wanted to cat. In this case, maybe to review the problem. Then you want to extend the command. Preserving it in the next commands where you start stacking on pipes is useful since it can be fewer strokes and maintain a habit.
It's ironic that the illustration for JavaScript is probably the most realistic and best solution IRL. In the sense that a lot of what problem solving is (which is a big part of software engineer) is breaking a big problem into smaller problems. And you continue doing this until each problem is solvable in a short period of time.
You're completely correct. But what I meant by that graphic is "poor solutions leading to more problems", not "breaking down problems into smaller ones". It was inspired by a cube drone comic that made the same complaint, but I can't find that particular comic now
I guess I have to defend this one. I personally think Typescript is the better language compared to typed Python or Ruby (two comparable languages based on how they are all used). Modern Javascript actually have a lot of nice language features, the only issue is the lack of types. Typescript doesn't entirely solve the problem but it's a decent attempt at it. A good typescript repo is decently readable, testable and performant enough for most use cases.
Typescript is wasted on JS. Currently getting a JS certification while porting an action script 3 project to JS, ActionScript 3 was the better language.
I mean good point, but if I'm just using bash as a shell and not writing a script, I'm probably first previewing the contents of a file with cat anyway, and recalling the last command and appending a | grep <pattern> to it is less keystrokes than re-writing the last command into grep <pattern> <file>. Especially if you're playing around with the pattern and trying to get it right, it's nice to have the pattern at the end of the line.
“I know nothing about this subject, I’m gonna post a meme (a funny graphic usually about a specific topic, this one outlining the differences between languages) but I know nothing about the subject and will ask that nobody correct me or try to apply rationale here because I choose to be ignorant and have no interest in expanding my knowledge of the world and people around me, I just want people to tell me I’m funny and give me internet points”
I believe the idea is to potentially induce a brief nasal snort possibly accompanied by a slight upward curling of the lips in those casually scrolling by. In other words, it's a joke, being posted on a joke community.
A coding humor community, if you gotta post about it, you should probably expect it.
We’re adults, we can joke about stuff and also talk about stuff… unless you’re not which would still be okay because I wouldn’t be interested in discussion then
To the point that I'm doubting the OP's non-knowledge.
He must know at least a lot of C++... But I disagree with the PHP one; it always transforms the problem, never leaves it alone. And transforms it very productively.