496

Life is hard (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by hypertown@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 49 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Missing type or identifier.

A const what?

Also, I read that you have to assign a const when it is declared. Something doesn’t feel right about this statement.

[-] Kaboom@reddthat.com 55 points 4 months ago

Its javascript, itll just let you do that

[-] vithigar@lemmy.ca 40 points 4 months ago

it'll just let you do that

Pretty much sums up JavaScript's entire philosophy.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Let me just coalesce these types for you.

[+] Kaboom@reddthat.com -16 points 4 months ago

Imo, its better for it. A tool shouldnt tell the user what to do

[-] Ziglin@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

But the CPU would be thoroughly confused in many cases. Like if you added a number with a string. This means low level tools have too and therefore people who do low level programming are confused and the generally carefree has rules can make it difficult to debug js.

Also I think rust making you write "safe" code unless you explicitly tell it otherwise is a great thing.

So I think that tools telling the user that they're doing something wrong is great, tools telling the user to stick with physical limitations for better performance are completely valid but what js does seem really weird with having constants be reassignable, making them nothing but labels combined with HTML I find it even more annoying.

[-] Justas@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

['a'] + ['b'] = 'ab'

Gets me every time.

[-] Ziglin@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I'm always more confused by adding integers to strings or something being an empty object because something else was undefined and the console didn't bother to tell me.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I think, most of us consider it part of the job of a good tool, that it prevents us from using it wrongly. Allows us to use it much more recklessly.

[-] skulbuny@sh.itjust.works -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You're downvoted, but you're 100% right. The web is designed to not break. Engineers who can't accept that don't get to complain

[-] TurtleTourParty@midwest.social 15 points 4 months ago

const long pain = 1;

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

void

[-] S0UPernova@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Maybe...

const pain = Infinity

[-] hypertown@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

:any

[-] pipe01@programming.dev 6 points 4 months ago

Ackshually you don't need a type qualifier in C

[-] Static_Rocket@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well, assuming you meant type specifier, at least not before C99. After that it is required. C23 explicitly states that a type specifier is required for all declarations.

If you actually meant type qualifier, then no. That was never required.