/tech/ - Technology★

>javascript is a programming language and you can make programs with it!

mind = blown

And what's wrong with modern JavaScript, honestly?

>>868121

A lot. There's only so much you can do if you're restricted by compatibility.

>>868121

It's so overused that I can't browse the web for 2 seconds without getting assaulted if I have JS enabled.

>>868121

>>868118

>>>/g/

>they made a shitty emulator

>this proves the language will take over

Not that there's anything wrong with javascript.

The web is dying. The future is in the hands of usenet, gopher, and BBS.

>>868128

because you visit shit sites

I don't have that problem tbqh

>>868125

>restricted by compatibility

You can code almost entirely in platform-agnostic JavaScript.

>>868128

>overused

>can't browse the web

That has nothing to do with core JavaScript as a programming language,

>>868142

Backward compatibility with old javascript standards.

Monolanguage is the future. Why would you even want to use different languages on the front and back end, when you have the option to use the same language for your entire stack? Until one of you sperglords writes a browser entirely in HolyC we're gonna be using JS for a long time so you might as well embrace it.

>>868155

when will it replace java and c#?

thing is its trash so its self defeating

you are going to write in something more robust in any situation once foundations crumble

>>868155

but if we are going to use one lang for everything, why choosing the most niggered shit language in JavaScript?

>>868129

>>>/nocoder/

>>868134

>Usenet

<LOL no

>Gopher

<5/5 pretty good

>BBS

<Again, LOL no

>>868147

Standards are made to be ignored. Just ask Chuck Moore.

>>868193

Javascript is pretty good, a c-syntaxed lisp. Don't judge a language on the bad examples. Not that you could, you clearly don't write code

>/tech/ suddenly likes javascript

what happened to this place?

>>868201

>a c-syntaxed lisp

Now that is some wishful thinking from a battered programmer.

JavaScript's ONLY problem is its shitty type system. Prove me wrong.

>inb4 "its not le C xddddd"

>>868201

>Standards are made to be ignored.

Nice quote, but it doesn't change the fact that even "modern" Javascript does this:

js> var n = [9, 4, 20, 50]; 
js> n.sort()                
[20, 4, 50, 9]

>>868237

>arr.sort([compareFunction])

>Specifies a function that defines the sort order. If omitted, the array is sorted according to each character's Unicode code point value, according to the string conversion of each element.

brainlet pajeet can't even use javascript correctly, wow.

>>868240

I can use Javascript correctly, but it takes extra effort and memorization because it's a bad language. A good language does sensible things by default. A language that does bullshit by default is a bad language.

I'm able to point out this failure of language design because I can use Javascript correctly. If I didn't know the default behavior was broken I wouldn't be able to use Javascript correctly.

>>868245

>sensible

>untyped

Pick one

>>868245

You're clueless if you think JS is the only language that lets you use a comparing function when sorting. Arrays aren't all the same type and it's also loosely typed, so obviously the language has to cater to sorting numbers, objects, strings, etc. all at the same time. Again, just RTFM faggot.

Any high level language is trash for anything real tbh. If you want to write a script for your personal computer go ahead anything above that C or maybe c++ if you are a queer.

>>868253

Javascript is a unusual in working without a comparison function but requiring one for sorting numbers.

If a comparison function is mandatory there are no surprises. If the default comparison function is sensible there are no surprises. But if there's a default comparison function and it's not sensible then you have a problem.

It's true that it's a consequence of weak dynamic typing. I think that means weak dynamic typing is bad.

>>868260

If you go into a dark room and say "C is the only real language" 3 times into a mirror, you suddenly become a programmer who actually makes things and doesn't spend all day trying to fit in on /tech/.

JavaScript is a typical product of the UNIX culture.

The following was brought to my attention by VP.
Try using bc to calculate the value of 163/ln(163)

Here's a Sun4:

   titanic:~[13] bc -l
   163/l(163)
   32.0-75570-60420-20649243140-49

Here's a DecStation:

   hindenburg:~[1] bc -l
   163/l(163)
   32.0-85189980504841560572

And I hacked the renderer code to throw cpp the proper
"-DFRAME=%05d" to spit out numbers the way I wanted
them. Why did I want the leading zeros? I don't know, I just
thought it was cleaner.

So I fired up the animation and let it run for a while
(days).

Well, the output was quite amusing (or at least it would
have been if I didn't need the results for my thesis defense
a week later). The object would go down for a few frames,
then jump up and go down a little, then go back to where it
maybe should have been, then jump up....

After a little headscratching, I realized that the leading
zeros in my frame numbers were causing cpp to treat them as
octal values. How precious.

But still, if I say "#define FRAME 00009" then "#if
FRAME==00009" should still fire (or it should at least whine
at me). Well, 00009==00009 does trigger, but so does
00009==00011.

Huh? 

Well, some C library thinks that the nine in 00009 isn't
octal, so it interprets it as 9 decimal. And 00011 is a fine
octal rep of 9 decimal.  So, both "#if FRAME==00009" and
"#if FRAME==00011" fired and I applied two translate calls
to my object geometry. And(!), it's not that having a
decimal digit makes the whole number decimal. The string
00019 gets interpreted as 00010 octal plus 9 decimal = 17
decimal.  Lovely, not.

>>868237

This is like those retards that complain about the isNaN function. NaN is a type. isNaN tells you if something is NaN or not. A string is not NaN. This shit is well documented, god damn. If you curry niggers actually spent 5 minutes reading the actual specs and docs instead of begging on stackoverflow you might actually be able to get something done.

>>868270

>Why did I want the leading zeros? I don't know, I just

>thought it was cleaner.

Fuck this guy too just use normal numbers jesus fucking christ.

>>868248

Statically typed UNIX weenie languages (C, C++, Java, Go) make static typing look bad too.

>>868266

>If you go into a dark room and say "C is the only real language" 3 times into a mirror, 00009 becomes equal to 00011 and demons fly out of your nose.

>>868274

I'm not surprised that the weenies who defend JavaScript mistakes also defend C mistakes, since most of these mistakes came from C and C culture in the first place.

   I've been confusing my compiler class with this one for
   a while now.  I pull it out any time someone counters my
   claim that C has no block structure.  They're usually
   under the delusion that {decl stmt} introduces a block
   with its own local storage, probably because it looks
   like it does , and because they are C programmers who
   use lots of globals and wouldn't know what to do with
   block structure even if they really had it.

   But because you can jump into the middle of a block, the
   compiler is forced to allocate all storage on entry to a
   procedure, not entry to a block.

    Hey, bud, whadduh mean we dont got no block structure?
Of -course- we got block structure. In fact, we got so much
block structure that at least one C compiler I know of
allocates the storage for a block when you enter the block,
just like you might expect. You jump, you lose. I asked them
about this. "Gosh, wow, why would you want to do that?"

    On a kinder note (sorry), it really does seem to be true
that most modern C compilers (read: ones that don't think
"flow analysis" is something you do to the drains after
you've peeled too many veggies into your kitchen sink) will
(yow!) -actually detect- which blocks can't be jumped into
the middle of, and block-allocate storage whenever they can
legally do so.

>>868277

00009 is not, in any way, shape, or form a valid and correct decimal number. It is, at best, a STRING representation of a number. This retard is complaining about the language not correctly interpreting his random-ass snowflake "numbers" when he could have just not been an idiot and has each FRAME be something sensible, like a god damn int. He thinks 00009 "looks" better? If he's looking at it somewhere he should have made it an actual string and printed it the fuck out, not tried to use it in expressions.

>>868270

You're so fucking retarded. Brendan Eich is a LISPer and that's why Javascript is so lisp-y. You wank off over the history of DEC and VAX (both of which SUCK DONKEY BALLS) whilst everyone else gets work done with simple tools.

>bc has a bug

Wow, great post!

>Autist can't program

Wow, great post!

>>868277

>Static typing is bad [Citation Needed]

<<Brainless wojack here>

>weenies

>weenies

>weenies

You are pathetic. There's a reason the "UNIX weenies" meme is dead, it's because everyone who used it - they're all Windows users now. And they're the kind of people who'll defend Windows' architectural decisions to the death. You're a fucking sperg, please stop posting these quotes from literal nobodies

>C has no block structure

What the fuck is this guy talking about? You're using this nonsense to try and be anti-C? You're a dumbass.

Can you get a tripcode, so I can filter you?

>>868282

>00009 is not, in any way, shape, or form a valid and correct decimal number

What the fuck? It's a prefectly acceptable, if wasteful, way to write down the number 9. In actual mathematical notation, leading zeroes are not significant and are completely ignored. A human reading 00009 will parse and evaluate the number as 9, wondering why the zeroes are even there since they don't change the result.

At least hexadecimal notation uses an actual character in its "0x" prefix; it's impossible to mistake it for a regular number. Recent languages even added a binary notation in the same form: "0b010101". Why wasnt octal designed the same? Why aren't octal numbers written as "0o1234567"? Using a leading zero is just moronic and inconsistent.

>>868308

No, it isn't. There isn't a single person on the fucking planet who wouldn't call you a moron ig you did this.

>>868121

Aside from being woefully inefficient and terribly slow, nothing at all.

>>868296

>You're so fucking retarded. Brendan Eich is a LISPer and that's why Javascript is so lisp-y.

JavaScript is from UNIX and C culture. It has C style control structures and syntax. It has names like "grep" from UNIX. It has that 00011 means 9 bullshit.

>You wank off over the history of DEC and VAX (both of which SUCK DONKEY BALLS) whilst everyone else gets work done with simple tools.

I think they have a reputation for SUCKING DONKEY BALLS because they ran UNIX like BSD and Ultrix. DEC was known for quality hardware and OSes before they went into the UNIX business.

>>bc has a bug

It's an indication of the low standards of UNIX programs. If a calculator fails at such basic math, why is it even on the computer in the first place?

>Static typing is bad [Citation Needed]

Static typing and dynamic typing are good, but not every kind of static or dynamic typing is good.

>What the fuck is this guy talking about? You're using this nonsense to try and be anti-C? You're a dumbass.

    Hey, bud, whadduh mean we dont got no block structure?
Of -course- we got block structure. In fact, we got so much
block structure that at least one C compiler I know of
allocates the storage for a block when you enter the block,
just like you might expect. You jump, you lose. I asked them
about this. "Gosh, wow, why would you want to do that?"

>Can you get a tripcode, so I can filter you?

<"Gosh, wow, why would you want to do that?"

    This poor user tried to use Unix's poor excuse for
DEFSYSTEM.  He is immediately sucked into the Unix "group of
uncooperative tools" philosophy, with a dash of the usual
unix braindead mailer lossage for old times' sake.

    Of course, used to the usual unix weenie response of
"no, the tool's not broken, it was user error" the poor user
sadly (and incorrectly) concluded that it was human error,
not unix braindamage, which led to his travails.

>>868121

Horrible semantics, disgusting edge cases when it comes to implicit type conversions.

>poorly reimplementing shit we already had 10 or 20 years ago in a way that is many orders of magnitude slower

>(((progress)))

>>868428

>JavaScript is from UNIX and C culture. It has C style control structures and syntax. It has names like "grep" from UNIX. It has that 00011 means 9 bullshit.

So you're just dense, got it.

>I think they have a reputation for SUCKING DONKEY BALLS because they ran UNIX like BSD and Ultrix. DEC was known for quality hardware and OSes before they went into the UNIX business.

They were popular - if they weren't shit people wouldn't have switched to UNIX.

>Static typing and dynamic typing are good, but not every kind of static or dynamic typing is good.

<<Brainless wojack here>

>DEFSYSTEM anecdote

Dumbass switches to new OS, doesn't read the man page, doesn't even attempt to use the system as intended... Gets burned. Someone too stupid to use *nix, wow.

Enjoy your SET command, you fucking gimp. Enjoy having 5 edit commands. Enjoy PIPE

>>868464

>00011 means 9

What? You mean "00011" divided into "0001 1", then reversing the bits in each group resulting in "1000 1", then adding the two groups to arrive at "1001"? what sense does that make?

>>868121

It’s hell, the platforms all have different bugs, it’ll never be finished, it’s wasteful, and it sucks.

>>868270

>not knowing that leading zeroes is octal notation, reserved for valid octal numbers

>complaining about undefined behavior when it occurs

Retard.

>>868272

NaN is not a type. It's a floating point number in a special state that makes results of any computations with it return NaNs. NaN is equal to nothing, not even itself. So, besides using the X != X trick, you need isNaN function to tell if a number is NaN.

>>868468

011 is octal for 9₁₀.

>>868492

>octal

What purposes does it still have to be used?

>>868486

>NaN is equal to nothing, not even itself.

There is not a single representation of NaN (every floating point number which has all exponent bits set but at least one mantissa bit zeroed represents NaN), so it'd be hard to expect using operators like == or != with them to make sense.

>>868501

Legacy code and to fuck with autists.

>>868502

NaN is defined not to be equal to anything. Its binary representation does not matter.

>>868502

>>868512

Just in case it wasn't clear: x == x resolves to false if x is NaN.

>>868212

You're missing the bigger picture. There are two kinds of behaviors that create the majority of posts here.

You've got the contrarians that look for the opinion of the month to regurgitate, and then you have the contrarians that realize they're agreeing with other people and so find a new opposing opinion to regurgitate. The virality of that opinion decides if the former group will adopt it and start the cycle over again.

>>868866

>then you have the contrarians that realize they're agreeing with other people and so find a new opposing opinion to regurgitate

It's disturbing how true this is. I just hate it when I give an amiable, sincere post and this happens. I mean, if you're going to contradict me, at least pretend like you took the time to read the thread--or even just the one post. Sometimes, I feel like it happens just out of sheer illiteracy--yet somehow either too lazy or too vain to just look up the word definition.

I don't understand how everyone can say unironically that this site is better than 4chan. Maybe you don't have the captcha, but that doesn't make the conversation any better, and the conversation on here is basically braindead highschool locker room talk. They're all taking pride in /b/-tier conversations when even /g/ looks down on /b/. Sure, maybe you can say this or that about hugboxes and SJW's and whatever; there's nothing wrong with a little flaming--if you put up a stimulating discussion, but just because there's nothing inherently wrong with being contrarian doesn't make a contrarian retard any less of a retard. But where to go?

>But where to go?

Sadly, you're best skimming every community and only interacting with a small group of people worth talking to.

The majority of people in most large communities are worthless when it comes to topics that take a combination of critical thinking and commitment to continual improvement. Most will be stuck as beginners because they can't/won't commit to the same train of thought for multiple days/weeks/months. The rest will get stuck at some arbitrary level/skillset because they've decided it's better to be good at what they can already do than bad at some new endeavor.

>>868894

Your mistake is thinking all boards are as bad as /tech/, which is full of actual pajeets are retards that are too stupid to dodge cuckchan bans. If every board was as bad as /tech/ I'd have moved on pronto.

>>868841

>Someone too stupid to use a shell is a UNIX hater

not surprised

>>868894

/tech/ is pretty fucking shit, but you are delusional if you think this is any worse than /g/. We do not have (or at least, didn't use to have before the recent influx of halfchan imbeciles) shitty smartphone threads, shitty wallpaper circlejerks where people only post screenshots and no rice recipes, shitty "r8 my build" threads, shitty leg shaving threads, shitty CPU/GPU vendor wars threads, shitty battlestation threads...

Technology boards in Futaba-style imageboards are dead. It's like browsing a place as pedantic and elitist as SlashDot, but everyone talks entirely out of their asses. Imageboards in general are on life support anyway, with most people attempting to provide anything of value for the community getting drowned in drama from fellow users who do not like to see anyone succeeding. Nobody no longers produce OC because it is frowned upon, because at some point in time we adopted a culture of lazyness that encourages bringing down those who are onto something with claims of not your personal army (you think Habbo raids would have been possible today? No, it is obviously a personal army request, not a way to have fun with fellow shitposters), baseless destructive criticism for the sake of acting like a tough guy and general assorted drama.

>>869402

>Nobody no longers produce OC

Wrong. I'm not sure why you believe this. There are plenty OC as screenshots posted to this board everyday. I even posted a picture of a simple LED card for Valentine's Day I made yesterday.

>>869402

>/tech/ is pretty fucking shit, but you are delusional if you think this is any worse than /g/. We do not have (or at least, didn't use to have before the recent influx of halfchan imbeciles) shitty smartphone threads, shitty wallpaper circlejerks where people only post screenshots and no rice recipes, shitty "r8 my build" threads, shitty leg shaving threads, shitty CPU/GPU vendor wars threads, shitty battlestation threads...

You're right. I totally forgot how big my filter was when posting on /g/. It literally filtered an average of 100 posts per board. Kind of ridiculous. 8ch is formulaic and repetitive, but I will admit that a filter that nixes redundant threads would be less effective here. What would be really nice, though, is an image filter for reaction images.

>>869430

>I even posted a picture of a simple LED card for Valentine's Day

You did?

Is there a chance the soy bullshit will actually go away? Or is the 90s/00s-born generation hopelessly lost and will irreparably drag technology down with them?