7 ms·

May want to remove from your "About Us" bio: "hates Java Script" -- can't say I disagree, but you might alienate potential converts -- really should inject as m

May want to remove from your "About Us" bio: "hates Java Script" -- can't say I disagree, but you might alienate potential converts -- really should inject as much positivity as possible. Any negative messaging will do nothing but harm.

wdanilo 9y ago
I prefer to alienate potential converts than convert JavaScripters! Just joking of course. It is hard to hide hate to a non-language treated as a super cool language. But you are right, I've never thought about it this way. I will change it, thank you!
- d3ckard 9y ago
  Well, it was pretty good ad for me, so maybe reconsider.
  - wdanilo 9y ago
    I will reconsider hiding my real feelings. I really feel I should not hide them ;)
    - Jach 9y ago
      Man people who would bail out of the entire project just because of one of the members' likes or dislikes on his bio snippet are petty, please don't optimize for those people...
      - dwaltrip 9y ago
        It's not some dramatic "bailing out of an entire project". A more realistic scenario would be: > "Oh here, that link sounds interesting." > "Hmm, another visual programing system, I wonder how it works." > Read for a few minutes, then clicks link to the about page > Reads part about hating javascript. "Huh.. I wonder why they hate it so much" > Gets distracted, makes some coffee > Comes back, and without really thinking about it, closes tab, and goes back to previous task In this scenario, they might have possibly investigated further and checked the project out. Overall, most people probably won't care, but I would guess the statement is slightly net negative. Taking a step back, this entire sub-thread is a fairly ridiculous bikeshedding, and I do feel a little bad about participating in it, heh.
      - Can_Not 9y ago
        JS devs encounter a lot of low effort BS/FUD from JS-haters who are clearly talking out of their ass or obviously haven't advanced their understanding of JS since 2005. If you're making something awesome, somebody's going to genuinely be interested if it's genuinely awesome regardless of their "fake language" background. So yeah, if I see "hates <literally any language>" in a profile, I'd probably assume the developer is pretentiously arrogant or will have the propensity to build a toxic community that focuses on bashing alternatives instead of building itself up.
    - crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
      Perhaps there's a way to present yourself authentically while still holding the door open for the Javascripters? Would "Loves dogs, hates Java Script, willing to meet you in the middle if you disagree on either" be accurate?
- imhoguy 9y ago
  Have you tried ECMAScript 6+? You could reconsider your hate ;)
  - SamUK96 9y ago
    Shhh you may fool the guy and make him look silly, that's not nice! ;)
- rexpop 9y ago
  This was a super-valid position until Sept. 14, 2015, when Node.js and io.js combined to establish a stable runtime. From that day forward, JS/ES have been fast to change and stable.
  - wdanilo 9y ago
    I don't care what they done in terms of stable runtime. I mean, I care, but not in the context of the language itself. Language is all - combined! The runtime, syntax, libs, everything. I call it "experience" or "feeling". I like the idea to treat JS as web assembler, but as a language, JS is just a garbage. It will be garbage until you will be able to write code, that seems completely valid unless you are super JS geek and know that it will break. I will not reconsider my hate until you will be able to write `['10','10','10','10','10'].map(parseInt)` and get `[10, NaN, 2, 3, 4]` as a result (just a small example of many). Sorry if that puts you off.
    - the_cat_kittles 9y ago
      it does, because you are clearly just a snob. its so obvious that people are just looking for reasons to hate javascript when they post shit like your dumb example. though i concede that is a pretty hilarious "wat". virtually all the dumb "gotchas" never show up, and the real gotchas are learned early, just like other languages. you are like a classical musician who thinks every other kind of music is not real and easy. the same damn attitude. go away
      - wdanilo 9y ago
        the_cat_kittles I think you don't get the point of my answer or simply my answer was confusing, sorry for that. I did not wanted to start a big discussion here and just throw a controversial, stupid example. But it very clearly shows my main point. The point is that it is easily to write a code in Javascript that looks ok, but is not. The lack of good type system, legacy of how it was implemented on the beginning and everything connected to lack of general safety leads to this conclusion.
- the_cat_kittles 9y ago
  in what way is javascript a non language? i write c, python and javascript- i dont see how one is any more of a language than another? you are baselessly pretentious
  - wdanilo 9y ago
    the_cat_kittles I did not wanted to hurt your feelings. Of course it is a language. By saying it is not I just wanted to express my strong anty-JS feelings, but they are of course very subjective :)
    - the_cat_kittles 9y ago
      cool, i didnt want to hurt your feelings, just point out that you are a baseless snob
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - loup-vaillant 9y ago
        If I had to guess, I would point out that JavaScript was originally hacked out in 10 days, and features a number of unforgivable flaws, such as a non-transitive equality operator, weird implicit conversions, or just plain trying to make sense of quite obviously nonsensical operations. To someone used to the mathematical rigour of typed functional languages, this is not even worth looking at. As far as I know, the success of JavaScript had nothing to do with its qualities as a language. It was timing and market forces. It was there, so people used it. Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to disparage Brendan Eich. I couln't do a tenth of what he did in 10 days. It's just that you get what you pay for. They should have taken the time to fix JavaScript's flaws instead of marketing the hell out of it right away. (Or should have they? Maybe JavaScript would have failed if released a few months later? Damned market. Damned path dependence.)
        the_cat_kittles 9y ago
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

wdanilo 9y ago

I prefer to alienate potential converts than convert JavaScripters! Just joking of course. It is hard to hide hate to a non-language treated as a super cool language. But you are right, I've never thought about it this way. I will change it, thank you!

d3ckard 9y ago
Well, it was pretty good ad for me, so maybe reconsider.
- wdanilo 9y ago
  I will reconsider hiding my real feelings. I really feel I should not hide them ;)
  - Jach 9y ago
    Man people who would bail out of the entire project just because of one of the members' likes or dislikes on his bio snippet are petty, please don't optimize for those people...
    - dwaltrip 9y ago
      It's not some dramatic "bailing out of an entire project". A more realistic scenario would be: > "Oh here, that link sounds interesting." > "Hmm, another visual programing system, I wonder how it works." > Read for a few minutes, then clicks link to the about page > Reads part about hating javascript. "Huh.. I wonder why they hate it so much" > Gets distracted, makes some coffee > Comes back, and without really thinking about it, closes tab, and goes back to previous task In this scenario, they might have possibly investigated further and checked the project out. Overall, most people probably won't care, but I would guess the statement is slightly net negative. Taking a step back, this entire sub-thread is a fairly ridiculous bikeshedding, and I do feel a little bad about participating in it, heh.
    - Can_Not 9y ago
      JS devs encounter a lot of low effort BS/FUD from JS-haters who are clearly talking out of their ass or obviously haven't advanced their understanding of JS since 2005. If you're making something awesome, somebody's going to genuinely be interested if it's genuinely awesome regardless of their "fake language" background. So yeah, if I see "hates <literally any language>" in a profile, I'd probably assume the developer is pretentiously arrogant or will have the propensity to build a toxic community that focuses on bashing alternatives instead of building itself up.
  - crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
    Perhaps there's a way to present yourself authentically while still holding the door open for the Javascripters? Would "Loves dogs, hates Java Script, willing to meet you in the middle if you disagree on either" be accurate?
imhoguy 9y ago
Have you tried ECMAScript 6+? You could reconsider your hate ;)
- SamUK96 9y ago
  Shhh you may fool the guy and make him look silly, that's not nice! ;)
rexpop 9y ago
This was a super-valid position until Sept. 14, 2015, when Node.js and io.js combined to establish a stable runtime. From that day forward, JS/ES have been fast to change and stable.
- wdanilo 9y ago
  I don't care what they done in terms of stable runtime. I mean, I care, but not in the context of the language itself. Language is all - combined! The runtime, syntax, libs, everything. I call it "experience" or "feeling". I like the idea to treat JS as web assembler, but as a language, JS is just a garbage. It will be garbage until you will be able to write code, that seems completely valid unless you are super JS geek and know that it will break. I will not reconsider my hate until you will be able to write `['10','10','10','10','10'].map(parseInt)` and get `[10, NaN, 2, 3, 4]` as a result (just a small example of many). Sorry if that puts you off.
  - the_cat_kittles 9y ago
    it does, because you are clearly just a snob. its so obvious that people are just looking for reasons to hate javascript when they post shit like your dumb example. though i concede that is a pretty hilarious "wat". virtually all the dumb "gotchas" never show up, and the real gotchas are learned early, just like other languages. you are like a classical musician who thinks every other kind of music is not real and easy. the same damn attitude. go away
    - wdanilo 9y ago
      the_cat_kittles I think you don't get the point of my answer or simply my answer was confusing, sorry for that. I did not wanted to start a big discussion here and just throw a controversial, stupid example. But it very clearly shows my main point. The point is that it is easily to write a code in Javascript that looks ok, but is not. The lack of good type system, legacy of how it was implemented on the beginning and everything connected to lack of general safety leads to this conclusion.
the_cat_kittles 9y ago
in what way is javascript a non language? i write c, python and javascript- i dont see how one is any more of a language than another? you are baselessly pretentious
- wdanilo 9y ago
  the_cat_kittles I did not wanted to hurt your feelings. Of course it is a language. By saying it is not I just wanted to express my strong anty-JS feelings, but they are of course very subjective :)
  - the_cat_kittles 9y ago
    cool, i didnt want to hurt your feelings, just point out that you are a baseless snob
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - loup-vaillant 9y ago
      If I had to guess, I would point out that JavaScript was originally hacked out in 10 days, and features a number of unforgivable flaws, such as a non-transitive equality operator, weird implicit conversions, or just plain trying to make sense of quite obviously nonsensical operations. To someone used to the mathematical rigour of typed functional languages, this is not even worth looking at. As far as I know, the success of JavaScript had nothing to do with its qualities as a language. It was timing and market forces. It was there, so people used it. Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to disparage Brendan Eich. I couln't do a tenth of what he did in 10 days. It's just that you get what you pay for. They should have taken the time to fix JavaScript's flaws instead of marketing the hell out of it right away. (Or should have they? Maybe JavaScript would have failed if released a few months later? Damned market. Damned path dependence.)
      - the_cat_kittles 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]