iamdisappoint@reddthat.com to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 month agoIt was best as a silly toy language in the 1990's...reddthat.comimagemessage-square164linkfedilinkarrow-up1682arrow-down185
arrow-up1597arrow-down1imageIt was best as a silly toy language in the 1990's...reddthat.comiamdisappoint@reddthat.com to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 month agomessage-square164linkfedilink
minus-squareFrankDeath@infosec.publinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 month agohttps://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
minus-squarehperrin@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 month agoYes, if you do silly things with JS, you generally get silly results instead of TypeErrors. I wouldn’t say that makes the language bad. It makes the language resilient to bad programming, which you’d generally want in the case of web pages.
https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
Yes, if you do silly things with JS, you generally get silly results instead of TypeErrors. I wouldn’t say that makes the language bad. It makes the language resilient to bad programming, which you’d generally want in the case of web pages.