That's correct, but only half correct :) Johnny-Five programs can run on board any SBC that runs Linux and can support Node.js. For those platforms, GPIO and serial bus interfaces are interacted with directly; examples…
"linting" is subjective, preferential—not required. Python built linting into the language itself and it's super annoying.
> behaviour is well defined. True, and we could go one step further: it's unambiguously defined, with invariant rules that can be used to prove a conformant implementation.
> Looks like it's been fixed in ES5 That was published 9 years ago.
9999999999999999 > Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER === true JavaScript numbers are IEEE754 double precision floating point format.
PL = Programming Language
Actually, 4 years ago and then again 3 years ago I said it was a total disaster. I have mountains of email reports from an audit of the project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
You're conflating "JavaScript the programming language" with "DOM, the awful sack of shit". Don't do that.
I absolutely agree with this. Several years ago I did the same exercise with Zepto, which definitively disproved its compatibility claim.
Yes, performance comparisons, but those could've been measurements of no-op versions of functions by the same name.
There isn't a single test for this project. How can its claims of jQuery-alike-ness be supported? Tests, or it doesn't exist.
If Facebook made use of smart OCAP practices, none of that would be possible. Use of object identity as a "security key" would prevent code that doesn't have access to the "key" object from being successful.
Boooorrrrring.
Open Wash.
Everyone loves a bit of HN-google-twitter juice for publishing some controversial anti-jQuery diatribe. yawn
No, they mean Node.bind(), it's a Polymer proposal.
> To be perfectly honest, I think it's a bit of a reach to suggest that I "probably need jQuery" because strict mode limitations caused problems within jQuery once upon a time (like, isn't that basically jQuery fixing a…
I wasn't being snarky, I was making playful jokes :P
MooTools modified built-in objects in future hostile ways. Do you miss that too?
So... browserify is like http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131111220942/harrypo...?
> These aren't really what the author claims. As the author, I can assure you they are what I claim them to be: Points in the source code that identify some issue in some browser. > The first two are actually the same…
<3 lol
If you like spirit, you'll love this: https://gist.github.com/rwaldron/8720084#file-reasons-md
Take only what you need https://github.com/jquery/jquery#modules
That's correct, but only half correct :) Johnny-Five programs can run on board any SBC that runs Linux and can support Node.js. For those platforms, GPIO and serial bus interfaces are interacted with directly; examples…
"linting" is subjective, preferential—not required. Python built linting into the language itself and it's super annoying.
> behaviour is well defined. True, and we could go one step further: it's unambiguously defined, with invariant rules that can be used to prove a conformant implementation.
> Looks like it's been fixed in ES5 That was published 9 years ago.
9999999999999999 > Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER === true JavaScript numbers are IEEE754 double precision floating point format.
PL = Programming Language
Actually, 4 years ago and then again 3 years ago I said it was a total disaster. I have mountains of email reports from an audit of the project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
You're conflating "JavaScript the programming language" with "DOM, the awful sack of shit". Don't do that.
I absolutely agree with this. Several years ago I did the same exercise with Zepto, which definitively disproved its compatibility claim.
Yes, performance comparisons, but those could've been measurements of no-op versions of functions by the same name.
There isn't a single test for this project. How can its claims of jQuery-alike-ness be supported? Tests, or it doesn't exist.
If Facebook made use of smart OCAP practices, none of that would be possible. Use of object identity as a "security key" would prevent code that doesn't have access to the "key" object from being successful.
Boooorrrrring.
Open Wash.
Everyone loves a bit of HN-google-twitter juice for publishing some controversial anti-jQuery diatribe. yawn
No, they mean Node.bind(), it's a Polymer proposal.
> To be perfectly honest, I think it's a bit of a reach to suggest that I "probably need jQuery" because strict mode limitations caused problems within jQuery once upon a time (like, isn't that basically jQuery fixing a…
I wasn't being snarky, I was making playful jokes :P
MooTools modified built-in objects in future hostile ways. Do you miss that too?
So... browserify is like http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131111220942/harrypo...?
> These aren't really what the author claims. As the author, I can assure you they are what I claim them to be: Points in the source code that identify some issue in some browser. > The first two are actually the same…
<3 lol
If you like spirit, you'll love this: https://gist.github.com/rwaldron/8720084#file-reasons-md
Take only what you need https://github.com/jquery/jquery#modules