More of a tragicomedy, really
Where’s your sense of adventure?!
Calling reverse()
on a function should return its inverse
You’re no fun
"E".reverse() == "∃"
I dint know many OO languages that don’t have a useless toString on string types.
Well, that’s just going to be one of those “it is what it is” things in an OO language if your base class has a toString()
-equivalent. Sure, it’s probably useless for a string, but if everything’s an object and inherits from some top-level Object
class with a toString()
method, then you’re going to get a toString()
method in strings too. You’re going to get a toString()
in everything; in JS even functions have a toString()
(the output of which depends on the implementation):
In a dynamically typed language, if you know that everything can be turned into a string with toString()
(or the like), then you can just call that method on any value you have and not have to worry about whether it’ll hurl at runtime because eg. String
s don’t have a toString
because it’d technically be useless.
Everything that’s an Object
is going to either inherit Object.prototype.toString()
(mdn) or provide its own implementation. Like I said in another comment, even functions have a toString()
because they’re also objects.
A String
is an Object
, so it’s going to have a toString()
method. It doesn’t inherit Object
’s implementation, but provides one that’s sort of a no-op / identity function but not quite.
So, the thing is that when you say const someString = "test string"
, you’re not actually creating a new String
object instance and assigning it to someString
, you’re creating a string
(lowercase s
!) primitive and assigning it to someString
:
Compare this with creating a new String("bla")
:
In Javascript, primitives don’t actually have any properties or methods, so when you call someString.toString()
(or call any other method or access any property on someString
), what happens is that someString
is coerced into a String
instance, and then toString()
is called on that. Essentially it’s like going new String(someString).toString()
.
Now, what String.prototype.toString()
(mdn) does is it returns the underlying string
primitive and not the String
instance itself:
Why? Fuckin beats me, I honestly can’t remember what the point of returning the primitive instead of the String
instance is because I haven’t been elbow-deep in Javascript in years, but regardless this is what String
’s toString()
does. Probably has something to do with coercion logic.
Which naturally means it’s impossible for it to be an issue for literally anybody else anywhere at any time
And no, before some dumb fuck has any bright ideas, I’m not saying this will be an issue for everybody, just that it’s absolutely fucking idiotic to pretend it’s never an issue.
It’s always great fun when people who have absolutely zero fucking clue how something works declare it “stupid”.
I got smoked out of a company I helped found because I had health issues, even though I was still capable of doing my job. It’s illegal to fire people for health issues here, but it’s not like firing someone is the only way to get rid of them.
Everybody who’s telling you you can legally use these appointments is probably completely correct (depending on your jurisdiction). Whether the legality actually matters is another thing entirely.
Not American, but excellent try anyhow.
Oh you sweet summer child
Mussolini had an actual career as an intellectual
Well, he certainly considered himself to be an intellectual. Whether he actually was one is another matter entirely
Considering that both Mussolini and Hitler were also incompetent fucking morons, it’s no surprise that modern fascists also pick leaders like them.
They’re sending their best.
I read news like this and I’m so happy I haven’t had to touch Windows since Win7
But the deal with IBS and IBD is that they can cause varying… uh, levels of diarrhea too – a purge might feel great but that shit (🥁) gets old pretty fast
Urr, I don’t think that’s it, I don’t think stereo sound for vinyls has ever worked so that something like this would be necessary and it wouldn’t really make sense – why would they have to put vocals on one channel and instruments on the other?
A stereo vinyl player just has the needle moving up and down in addition to left and right, so that the left-right axis is the sum of the waveforms of both channels and the up-down axis is the difference – which means that a regular mono player can play stereo vinyls