• brb@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    13時間前

    Except for some reason “2” is interpreted as a month, and the year is set to 2001.

    Aight I’m out

  • lunarul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    19時間前

    If you’re not very familiar with JS, watch the Wat talk before taking the quiz to know what to expect from this wonderful language.

      • festus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8時間前

        Yes and no. Wasm has no “standard library” so if you wanted to use Dates, your wasm would need to have its own implemation bundled for when the user visits the page. Ditto for everything else including string support! As you can imagine having to ship all this basic functionality can bloat the wasm and slow page loads.

        You also can’t fully escape JS, as the only way wasm can interact with the page & browser are through the JS functions you write and make available to your wasm. I suppose you could take advantage of this to not have to ship your own standard library & use the JS Date implementation, but at that point why not just use JS?

        Wasm has strengths but it’s not suitable for replacing JS for everyday websites.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9時間前

          It unquestionably is excellent. Can you name another language in common use with a type system that’s close to the expressiveness of Typescript?

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          16時間前

          How? It’s easy not to run into the common issues by using TS. What’s so bad about it that we should throw away the existing ecosystem?

          Please give arguments instead of platitudes.

          • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9時間前

            You don’t need to use TS to avoid common issues. If you add an empty object to an empty array and expect a meaningful result, the problem sits in front of the keyboard.

            • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9時間前

              Sure, discipline can prevent some errors. But it’s always possible to run into wrong type assumptions, and I’d say type coercion and null/undefined access make up a fairly large percentage of non-logic errors. You can entirely prevent those using Typescript, which is why it’s so useful.

              Static type analysis is always a good idea if you’re writing more than a couple lines. IMO Python is the worst offender with its kwargs etc. - discoverability and testability is just so bad if you’re following common Python idioms.

  • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1日前

    I am a frontend dev. JavaScript (well, TypeScript) is my bread and butter. Even knowing its quirks I never would have thought how inconsistent Date actually is. I encourage everyone to try this quiz.

    This is what JavaScript haters should bring forth, not 0.1 + 0.2 !== 0.3!

    • dalekcaan@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21分前

      Or the ones where people point out how inconsistent JS is with adding strings to numbers.

      Yeah, maybe don’t do arithmetic on numbers as strings?

    • Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      18時間前

      Floating point rounding issues are basic comp science issues. Hopefully nobody thinks that those are JavaScript quirks.

    • Tanoh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1日前

      There is a reason almost everyone use some Date lib, like Luxon and not the built in. And well, having a horrible built in lib that they can’t change due to legacy code breaking is nothing really new or unique to JS.

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10分前

        The built-in lib is fine for basic stuff unless you do some crazy shit like expecting "2" to parse as a valid date.

  • Macallan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    22時間前

    I got a 4/28 and got told I would have scored higher if I guessed at random. Ouch. (I am not a dev)

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16時間前

      I mean, for what it’s worth, I’m a seasoned dev and just did a run where I tried to answer everything as it makes sense to me (which is “throws an error” or “invalid date” for all of them) and I also got a score of 4/28.

      …and two of those points were given to me, because the quiz interpreted my answer differently than I meant it.

      In other words, this quiz exists to highlight that JavaScript’s Date functions make no sense.

  • tleb@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    21時間前

    I scored 17/28 on https://jsdate.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

    Idk anything about Date but got pretty far with intuition of JS whackiness