6 ms·
To put things in perspective, the comet, 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, is about 4km in diameter, moving at 135,000kms per hour. Rosetta's rendezvousing with the co
by bwang29 8y ago
To put things in perspective, the comet, 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, is about 4km in diameter, moving at 135,000kms per hour. Rosetta's rendezvousing with the comet required travelling a cumulative distance of over 6.4 billion kms. Gravity assists were needed from four planetary flybys – one of Mars (2007) and three of Earth (2005, 2007 and 2009) – a long circuitous trip that took ten years to complete.
Now back to my Javascript callback bugs
- mark_edward 8y agoTo be fair, people have been studying and predicting celestial movements for millennia, and boiled it down to unbelievably precise mechanical formulae. JS is poorly understood in comparison. I say this to hope you feel better at work. I've been pressed into frontend web work and it's fractal complexity.
- tenaciousDaniel 8y agoJS is poorly understood in comparison This might be the most hilariously ridiculous true statement I've ever heard.
- Tepix 8y agoIn javascript: x == x _ is true. Good. x == !x _ is also true. Oops? And guess what: Array(3)==",," _ is also true. But NaN == NaN _ is false. Math.max()>Math.min() _ is also false! but then again Math.max()<Math.min() _ is true. Madness, I tell you!
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- bjoli 8y agoI just looked at the famous left-pad for the fastest way o implementing a pad function in JS. I asked a friend that does web dev and it is apparently pretty idiomatic JS. Pretty appalling. I finally understood why people claimed it was "hard to get right".
- scott_s 8y agoNaN not being equal to itself is true in all languages with IEEE compliance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaN
- conistonwater 8y agoNitpick: NaN is supposed to work like that: the rule is that every comparison of any value against NaN returns false.
- sixothree 8y agoAt least x === x, right?
- dak1 8y agoconst x = NaN; x === x; // false
- SkyMarshal 8y ago:D Many more Javascript WTF's here: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=javascript+wtf https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=javascript+wtf
- joezydeco 8y agoBut they're close to getting two numbers to add together! https://twitter.com/thomasfuchs/status/933447631514169344 https://twitter.com/thomasfuchs/status/933447631514169344
- sandebert 8y agoThey should use jQuery for that. I hear it's good for all the things.
- bitwize 8y agoYes, but you're wading into the JavaScript weeds for what? More CRUD forms? Meanwhile... "With a combination of large ground-based FORTRAN programs and small spacecraft-based assembly language programs, [Real Programmers] are able to do incredible feats of navigation and improvisation -- hitting ten-kilometer wide windows at Saturn after six years in space, repairing or bypassing damaged sensor platforms, radios, and batteries. Allegedly, one Real Programmer managed to tuck a pattern-matching program into a few hundred bytes of unused memory in a Voyager spacecraft that searched for, located, and photographed a new moon of Jupiter. The current plan for the Galileo spacecraft is to use a gravity assist trajectory past Mars on the way to Jupiter. This trajectory passes within 80+/-3 kilometers of the surface of Mars. Nobody is going to trust a PASCAL program (or a PASCAL programmer) for navigation to these tolerances."
- Jesus_Jones 8y agoThose are impressive sounding achievements. I haven't heard of all of those, can you provide references or details about the stories?
- bitwize 8y agoI'd like to, but the original was from "Real Programmers Don't Use Pascal" by Ed Post: http://web.mit.edu/humor/Computers/real.programmers http://web.mit.edu/humor/Computers/real.programmers You would be better off asking him about the veracity of the stories.
- adonovan 8y agoIt's true. Some of the greatest minds have spent 20 fruitless years trying to discover a unified theory of object fields and elementary values in JavaScript.
- dehef 8y agoObservable.of(rosetta) .map(rocket => gravityAssist(rocket,'Earth')) .map(rocket => gravityAssist(rocket,'Mars')) .map(rocket => gravityAssist(rocket,'Earth')) .map(rocket => gravityAssist(rocket,'Earth')) .do(rocket => land(rocket)) .do(rocket => tweetVideo()) .catch(error => kaput(error))
- iliketosleep 8y agoOr just simply: npm install rosetta-67P-rendezvous
- aalleavitch 8y agoThen somehow get a completely incomprehensible error about Visual Studio executables.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- matte_black 8y agoUse yarn
- VikingCoder 8y agoOops. The new probe smashed into Mars at 146 km per second. It was a leftpad error.
- mkirklions 8y ago>Now back to my Javascript callback bugs Check to make sure you are running the right files... Spelling/Capital letter errors... Returning after selecting a case... Just some horror stories that cost me 8 days...
- robotresearcher 8y agoMoving at 135,000 km/h relative to what? (honest question)
- airstrike 8y agoYour momma
- logfromblammo 8y agoI presume relative to the solar barycenter, and Wikipedia says that speed is its maximum speed (at perihelion of about 1.3 AU). For reference, Earth does a mean speed of about 107,000 km/h relative to the solar system's center of mass.
- z3t4 8y agoI guess relative to the stars in the image, using parallax.
- ars 8y agoNo, relative to the stars it's going a LOT faster than that! Most likely it's relative to the sun.