OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 年前parseInt(5)lemmy.mlimagemessage-square64linkfedilinkarrow-up1506arrow-down16
arrow-up1500arrow-down1imageparseInt(5)lemmy.mlOsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 年前message-square64linkfedilink
minus-squarejjjalljslinkfedilinkarrow-up39arrow-down3·1 年前Javascript could throw an error to alert you that the input is supposed to be a string, like most languages would do.
minus-squareheavy@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down7·1 年前Theoretically, Javascript is an untyped language, so there aren’t supposed to really be static types. Giving type errors in this situation would be against design.
minus-squareheavy@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 年前Lol you’ll get no argument from me. It’s not my favorite language.
minus-squarebleistift2@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down1·1 年前JavaScript has types and it does have type errors, for instance > null.foo Uncaught TypeError: null has no properties Please stop spouting nonsense on issues you know nothing about.
minus-squareheavy@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down5·1 年前Dynamic types aren’t static types my man. I think you got some learning to do.
minus-squareheavy@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·1 年前Lol like facilitate versus effectuate
minus-squarezqwzzle@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down3·1 年前 Theoretically, Javascript is an untyped language… Function only handles string arguments correctly. Wat.
minus-squareVictor@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down6·edit-21 年前But you’re calling a function specifically made for passing a string to an int… 😆 There’s gotta be some common sense somewhere here, guys. Still, it’s a very good point. JS should do this. I would suspect one reason it doesn’t do this is to be backwards compatible.
minus-squarelistless@lemmy.cringecollective.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 年前And god fucking forbid that common sense be in the language. Who the fuck needs a language with common sense, amirite?
Javascript could throw an error to alert you that the input is supposed to be a string, like most languages would do.
Theoretically, Javascript is an untyped language, so there aren’t supposed to really be static types. Giving type errors in this situation would be against design.
Maybe the design is bad, then.
Lol you’ll get no argument from me. It’s not my favorite language.
JavaScript has types and it does have type errors, for instance
> null.foo Uncaught TypeError: null has no propertiesPlease stop spouting nonsense on issues you know nothing about.
Dynamic types aren’t static types my man. I think you got some learning to do.
You did say untyped though.
Lol like facilitate versus effectuate
Function only handles string arguments correctly. Wat.
But you’re calling a function specifically made for passing a string to an int… 😆 There’s gotta be some common sense somewhere here, guys.
Still, it’s a very good point. JS should do this.
I would suspect one reason it doesn’t do this is to be backwards compatible.
And god fucking forbid that common sense be in the language. Who the fuck needs a language with common sense, amirite?
🤪