25 points

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

permalink
report
reply
2 points

if cows could be on the C++ committee i would eat nothing but hamburgers

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

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

permalink
report
reply
12 points

“JavaScript” isn’t so bad with React + Next + Typescript + Lodash + …

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points
*

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.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

I learned today, that in JavaScript

[2,-2,6,-7].sort()
results in

[-2,-7,2,6]

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

WTF is it casting it to string or something?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You can bet your pants it does!

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

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:

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Typescript is hands down the most pleasant language to work in

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

That’s just what I’d expect an evil chicken to say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Few people use just Typescript, though - there’s always dangerously exposed native libraries in the mix.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I wish I could go to sleep at any time of day with just a bucket.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Flying short distances and ability to expand your neck like 4x also looks cool.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

if a chicken could code, it would use CHICKEN.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
7 points

Oh this is actually a real thing I was rolling my eyes like “just show me the clicks and clucks in the code”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Like the cow one that’s just a sequence of differently-capitalised moos.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

why do beards make men shitheels ?

even santa only gives the good stuff to rich kids

permalink
report
reply
-2 points
*

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

Let me reach around mine to give you an upvote.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Programmer Humor

!programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

Create post

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.

Community stats

  • 4.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 943

    Posts

  • 10K

    Comments

Community moderators