3 ms·
It wouldn't have 200k downloads a week unless there was a large number of programmers who didn't know how to do it. I mean we're talking FizzBuzz secret sauce
by kristopolous 3y ago
It wouldn't have 200k downloads a week unless there was a large number of programmers who didn't know how to do it.
I mean we're talking FizzBuzz secret sauce here. This must be total black magic for a catastrophic percentage of programmers
- RugnirViking 3y agoA more catastrophic number of programmers a) dont know how dependencies work and b) think everyone else are idiots.
- kristopolous 3y agoPerhaps, I solidly understand how dependencies work and in this case my observation is defensible Someone made the decision to use that and someone thought using stuff made by a person's who makes those kinds of decisions was a good idea and so on. You can git blame dependencies all the way down and research the parties involved. I've done it, built tools for it even. A stack of people who make bad decisions doesn't make good software.
- robertlagrant 3y agoMore likely the author made another, more useful, package that uses it.
- arzig 3y agoI have not read the source but I had always assumed that this was the lovingly crafted effort of someone who is intimately familiar with the js standard making sure that some hypothetical expression like ![1] is neither odd nor even. Surely the idea that modulo is beyond developers is too horrifying to contemplate.
- fifilura 3y agoSad but true. For JavaScript these kind of functions can actually be useful because of all the quirks. If that was the GPs hint then I can understand.
- School-Cotton 3y agoHere you go: /*! * is-odd <https://github.com/jonschlinkert/is-odd> * * Copyright (c) 2015-2017, Jon Schlinkert. * Released under the MIT License. */ 'use strict'; const isNumber = require('is-number'); module.exports = function isOdd(value) { const n = Math.abs(value); if (!isNumber(n)) { throw new TypeError('expected a number'); } if (!Number.isInteger(n)) { throw new Error('expected an integer'); } if (!Number.isSafeInteger(n)) { throw new Error('value exceeds maximum safe integer'); } return (n % 2) === 1; }; It does some checking the `value` is an integer in the safe range, which doesn't even seem right to me. Why shouldn't you be able to call this on integers outside the save range?