iamdisappoint@reddthat.com to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agoIt was best as a silly toy language in the 1990's...reddthat.comimagemessage-square160linkfedilinkarrow-up1683arrow-down179
arrow-up1604arrow-down1imageIt was best as a silly toy language in the 1990's...reddthat.comiamdisappoint@reddthat.com to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agomessage-square160linkfedilink
minus-squareFrankDeath@infosec.publinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 days agohttps://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
minus-squarehperrin@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 days 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.