ryan

11 ms·

151.
Ask HN: What would JavaScript and CSS look like if it were created today?
3 points by __ryan__ 6y ago|1 comments
152.
by __ryan__ 6y ago
Similarly, ask Siri to “play all of my music, except classical music”. Siri responds “OK, classical music coming up.”
153.
by __ryan__ 6y ago
> You lose flexibility when suddenly everything is locked to each other by name. Even if Account and Person both has a first and last name fields, you can't use both of them if the function is expecting a Account and only use the fi
154.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
My point was not that you must use ES6 modules— my point was that webpack does NOT use ES6 modules so it must include a framework for importing, exporting, and otherwise consuming the bundles. Serious questions, please don’t dance around th
155.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Agreed. Internet Explorer was almost certainly not written in JavaScript at all— most likely C++.
156.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
> It's just a module bundler. It is how Webpack works, actually. Webpack does not support bundling to native ES6 modules [0], it has to bundle into a format which requires runtime code being injected to execute properly, handling im
157.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Epic point being made here. TypeScript is Vanilla JS as well because it outputs JS.
158.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Because you end up with Webpack runtime code in your bundles. No different than if you included a library’s source code in your code— it would not be vanilla JS.
159.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
This article is not advocating using spacer components like so: <MyComponent></MyComponent> <div class="spacer"></div> <MyComponent></MyComponent> They are describing
160.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Can you expand on this? What about these adjectives are a meme? To me, the “tech person gives advice while brazenly cursing to show how serious and authoritative they are” is a meme. Edit: I just learned that “cringey” is not In most dictio
161.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
seriouslyjuststayhome.com is just as blunt and not as edgy/cringe-y.
162.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008) uses the surface to air system used in this operation as a plot device, I believe.
163.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Trolling? It’s referred to as “async_executors” in the article. I think HN just capitalizes the first letter of post titles.
164.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
It's only "wearable" if your definition of "wearable" doesn't take into account style. I mean, come on! The space age design wouldn't pair well at all with my wardrobe. Can you imagine that clunky thing ov
165.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Works fine for me on iOS 13.3
166.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
> (Hint: some of those seemingly random characters pull a double quote out of JS' leaky guts. Nope! It’s just JSFuck [0] 1. All objects have a `toString` method that returns a string. 2. Object properties can be accessed by subscri
167.
Ask HN: Are Ghosts Real?
4 points by __ryan__ 7y ago|8 comments
168.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
let a = a.project(); a = debug(a) a = a.eject(); This is perfectly legal.
169.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
Very excited to buy the book once it's finished as well. I discovered the series after I stumbled upon Luxe during my Haxe development days. *Off topic: Very excited for Luxe 1.0 and Wren as well.
170.
by __ryan__ 7y ago
> Really, there is no reason why a form should require JavaScript. I’m a web developer who has never done significant forms without JavaScript. So I’m curious: how would you handle reactive form fields without client side scripting? For
171.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
> that seems neither useful or desirable. To you. JavaScript and TypeScript are the languages I am most productive in. There are use cases that I would benefit from being able to compile JavaScript to another language, or native code.
172.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
This would not account for emails which have a custom subdomain but are still hosted by gmail, which will behave the same way as gmail with respect to the "+" sign (I've seen many universities do this).
173.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
- via Hacker News
174.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
The type guard returns true if person is a wizard. The if statement handles the case that person is not a wizard. The only case left is that person is a wizard.
175.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
1. Introducing a whole new syntax that has multiple irregularities (property access) and uses a special character. I sincerely fail to see how this has irregularities. It's straightforward. x.#prop is always a private field a
176.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
The spec (and the committee) has defined "private fields" to mean that anything outside of the defining class (including subclasses) should have no knowledge of them. If your subclass needs to know about the property, make it &quo
177.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
First, about accessing private fields on members of the same class: the spec will allow this via `other.#foo`. The reason I said that the difference between `object.foo` and `object.#foo` is not purely syntax is because they are two complet
178.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
I don't know what the spec's solution for that would be, but what you've typed would not work. Specifically because when I say `this.#foo` it is not a property on the object named "#foo". It is just the syntax for l
179.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
It's more of a side effect that the class can define these properties of the same name. The real goal is that in the following example, the private property #x is not affected. class A { #x = 100; } const a = new A();
180.
by __ryan__ 8y ago
Not accurate. The private fields described in the spec are not properties on the object's map. Thats why they need to differentiate intention at the call site. The current idea is that private fields are kinda like this: export cl

More ›

__ryan__

ryan