Just comment out the window until it is fixed. Either way it isn’t dangerous as long as you surround it with try/catch.
But I don’t know exactly about that catch part if something happens a few miles above.
I have a question of the same kind, how do they do when they clearly sniff coke ? What kind of white powder isn’t harmful to the nose is used in cinema ?
I miss that game. Not much tickles the same creativity and playfulness that I’ve tried since then. I used to spend hours in the level creator doing dumb stuff.
Yeah, it’s true. I knew all the other ones, had to put that one in the dev tools console to believe it. I was just happy to know === continues to be sane in that comparison.
That would be weird if a string containing a space wasn't equal to 0 " " == 0, but that's not the case in JS. If you think that "" and " " being equal to 0 is weird then I agree, but since they are, you should expect "t" and "n" to equal 0 too.
The == operator in JS will try to cast the things being compared and do all kinds of ‘smart’ assumptions about what equality means. This is why everyone uses === instead…
If " " wasn't equal to 0, it wouldn't make sense, but since a string containing a space equals 0, you'd expect the same to apply to a string containing a tab or a newline. (or at least I'd expect that)
I admit I have never dabbled in javascript, despite being a proficient programmer. I now dread to ask... would any string that contains only whitespace == 0? " \t\n \t " for example?
Yes, it would. Just like a string of spaces " " == 0, but it isn't that bad; === is Javascript's version of == in other languages, and, thus, you should be using it if you don't want that wonkiness.
== is just for convenience, like when you want to make sure that the user didn't leave the form empty and the button shouldn't be greyed out, and other UI stuff. Without these kinds of features JS wouldn't be used in so many toolkits.
Ok, I always mistakenly assumed === was the identity operator in JS, too. TIL, thanks! As much as we like to poke fun at JS, every time I’m taught the rationale behind some aspect of it, I find it redeeming and even a little endearing.
The explanation given to you makes it sound like == was deliberately designed to be a more convenient version of ===, but what actually happened was that == used to be the only equality operator in JavaScript, which meant that if you didn’t want it’s auto-coercing behavior then you needed to go out of your way to add additional type checks yourself. Because this was obviously a tremendously inconvenient state of affairs, the === operator was introduced later so that you could test for equality without having to worry about JavaScript doing something clever underneath the hood that you weren’t expecting.
The explanation given to you makes it sound like == was deliberately designed to be a more convenient version of ===
I mean technically == was deliberately designed to be a more convenient version of other languages’ == operator… Just specifically more convenient for light UI stuff since that was all JavaScript was supposed to be used for at the time (or all they thought it would be used for).
But give programmers a way to write and execute a small script and someone will eventually use that to try and write an emulator that emulates the computer it’s running on, so the web evolved into more complicated applications, and then that convenience turned out to be wildly inconvenient, not to mention horribly unexpected for programmers coming from other languages, so then they added the triple equality to match other languages.
You have to remember that the underlying principle of JavaScript seemed to be “never throw an error”, even if what it’s being told to do is weapons grade bollocks.
It’s hilarious seeing all the genius commenters who didn’t read the linked article and are repeating all the exact answers and arguments that the article rebuts :)
I’m still not used to having combined image and text posts so I usually don’t notice the text portion if it isn’t a big ol’ wall and I hope I’m not the only one.
❤️ True, but I think one of the biggest problems is that it’s pretty long and because you can’t really sense how good/bad/convining the text is it’s always a gamble for everybody if it’s worth reading something for 30min just to find out that the content is garbage.
I hope I did a decent job in explaining the issue(s) but I’m definitely not mad if someone decides that they are not going to read the post and still comment about it.
Always on hjkl to move, and always ready to insert (i), append (a) or insert before (O) or after (o) line and fast escape with esc.
For search and rescue missions usually use the /.
They need a vim drill before combat.
Yeah, I’m chalking that up to Python’s untypedness. I was going to write “integers”, but technically that function takes a “num”, whatever that is.
For all we know, it could be a string, asking ChatGPT to hack the government. Is that even? Probably no. Or None. Or T-Rex. Without reading the entire function, we don’t know that it’s not returning T-Rex.
Thankfully, it doesn’t matter. Just stick the result into an if-else, then False and None will land you in the else-branch. And both True and our Truthiness-Rex will land you in the if-branch. Just as Guido intended.
Sorry. I’m just trying to do something with my time until I go to the Mayo Clinic on the 15th. I can leave though. Some people here seem to want me to…
Edit: Or maybe not the 15th. They lost my appointment. Rescheduled for March 28th. Meanwhile, I’m looking elsewhere.
No one is universally loved. Everyone brave enough to put themselves out there will have people push back and talk trash. If doing what you do brings you some joy, do your best to ignore them and push on.
I appreciate it, but I don’t think I’m dying quite yet. And it’s definitely not cancer or anything like that. Honestly, despite all that, I feel fine most of the time. Which is part of what makes it so weird.
Random question, but do hot showers help? I noticed a while back that you mentioned weed on some comment or other. I once lived with this family who had a woman in her late 50’s who was a chronic (and I mean CHRONIC) user. She was struggling with nausea that was only alieviated by hot showers (idk why she told me this we weren’t close). Turns out there’s a condition:
I’m afraid there’s nothing for them to help with. Hyperemesis is extremely unlikely. I don’t vomit, I dry heave. And usually only once a day, soon after I get up. And hyperemesis also involves nausea, which I don’t have.
From what I’ve seen one dude is salty and everyone else (including myself) is happy to have your contributions! I don’t necessarily agree with you on everything you post, but you’re respectful and actually back up what you say. I respect that a hell of a lot more than someone who I’m in complete agreement with, but plugs their ears at the first sign of pushback.
Thanks. I hate the Reddit squabbling. I wish people could disagree without insults and I won’t take part in it. I also think people should back up their claims. I don’t expect everyone to feel the same way I do, I just wish so many people didn’t.
programming.dev
Top