2 ms·

So their argument in favor of this fugly new operator is that some people write unreadable code? That's not the language's fault. As they say, you can write FOR

by tgv 4y ago

So their argument in favor of this fugly new operator is that some people write unreadable code? That's not the language's fault. As they say, you can write FORTRAN in any language. This just gives them a new tool to make things even worse. chalk.dim(Object.keys(envars) .map(envar => `${envar}=${envars[envar]}`) .join(' ') |> `$ ${%}`, 'node', args.join(' ')) |> console.log(%); And it doesn't even work on objects. Lame. I know the reason: JS has no typing. Still is lame.

8note 4y ago
I'm trying to compare this to the jQuery kinda syntax X .this() .that() .then() .do() .a() .thing() And I expect this to let me keep that chain going for when I need to run a static function against the chain X .this() .that() .then() .do() .a() .thing() |>JSON.stringify(%)
- mkl 4y ago
  To format code as code, indent two spaces: https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc