• Thinker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thank god Temporal is finally in Stage 3, and already rolled out in Firefox. I can’t wait to be done with JS’s Date forever.

  • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Great quiz. It teaches you the rules while training you to expect the unexpected, even in the rare cases that the rules are applied consistently.
    I got exactly half the questions right.

    • salmoura@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I scored 8/28 on https://jsdate.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

      don't tap for spoilers

      The sequence of questions about new Date(“0”), new Date(“1”), and new Date(“2”) got me good.

      • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was so funny, I had to pause taking the quiz I was laughing so hard at question 9. The snark in the explanations is fantastic.

  • mesa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I did not do well:

    “I scored 9/28 on https://jsdate.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.”

    Ive been a dev for a long time. Im glad im not doing javascript all that much anymore.

  • Macallan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I got a 4/28 and got told I would have scored higher if I guessed at random. Ouch. (I am not a dev)

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, for what it’s worth, I’m a seasoned dev and just did a run where I tried to answer everything as it makes sense to me (which is “throws an error” or “invalid date” for all of them) and I also got a score of 4/28.

      …and two of those points were given to me, because the quiz interpreted my answer differently than I meant it.

      In other words, this quiz exists to highlight that JavaScript’s Date functions make no sense.

  • tleb@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I scored 17/28 on https://jsdate.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

    Idk anything about Date but got pretty far with intuition of JS whackiness

  • lunarul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’re not very familiar with JS, watch the Wat talk before taking the quiz to know what to expect from this wonderful language.

  • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am a frontend dev. JavaScript (well, TypeScript) is my bread and butter. Even knowing its quirks I never would have thought how inconsistent Date actually is. I encourage everyone to try this quiz.

    This is what JavaScript haters should bring forth, not 0.1 + 0.2 !== 0.3!

    • Tanoh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a reason almost everyone use some Date lib, like Luxon and not the built in. And well, having a horrible built in lib that they can’t change due to legacy code breaking is nothing really new or unique to JS.

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The built-in lib is fine for basic stuff unless you do some crazy shit like expecting "2" to parse as a valid date.

        • Tanoh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          For very basic things maybe, but it has a lot of other weird problems and restrictions. Mutability, no real timezone support, very limited arithmetic, to name a few. As soon as you move beyond the very basic, you want someting more robust.

    • dalekcaan@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or the ones where people point out how inconsistent JS is with adding strings to numbers.

      Yeah, maybe don’t do arithmetic on numbers as strings?

    • Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Floating point rounding issues are basic comp science issues. Hopefully nobody thinks that those are JavaScript quirks.

      • festus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes and no. Wasm has no “standard library” so if you wanted to use Dates, your wasm would need to have its own implemation bundled for when the user visits the page. Ditto for everything else including string support! As you can imagine having to ship all this basic functionality can bloat the wasm and slow page loads.

        You also can’t fully escape JS, as the only way wasm can interact with the page & browser are through the JS functions you write and make available to your wasm. I suppose you could take advantage of this to not have to ship your own standard library & use the JS Date implementation, but at that point why not just use JS?

        Wasm has strengths but it’s not suitable for replacing JS for everyday websites.

      • sudo_halt@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dart is fucking amazing and it compiles to native code, transpiles to JS (with some restrictions on concurrency because of web workers) and also supports WASM.

        Really if you want to write async and stream based code Dart is very good

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It unquestionably is excellent. Can you name another language in common use with a type system that’s close to the expressiveness of Typescript?

          • expr@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Typescript has a decent type system, but it’s hardly state of the art. It’s impressive how they’ve managed to mostly corral JavaScript into something much more sane, but at the end of the day it still suffers greatly from the limitations of JavaScript. They’ve essentially retrofitted some type theory onto JavaScript to make it possible to express JavaScript nonsense in the type system, but there’s plenty of things that would have been designed differently had they been making something from scratch. Not to mention that the type system is unsound by design, which by itself puts it behind languages designed from the ground up to have sound type systems.

            There’s many, many things missing from the type system, like higher-kinded types, type-driven deriving/codegen, generalized algebraic data types (aka GADTs), type families (and relatedly, associated types), existentially-quantified types, and much more.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          How? It’s easy not to run into the common issues by using TS. What’s so bad about it that we should throw away the existing ecosystem?

          Please give arguments instead of platitudes.

          • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You don’t need to use TS to avoid common issues. If you add an empty object to an empty array and expect a meaningful result, the problem sits in front of the keyboard.

            • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure, discipline can prevent some errors. But it’s always possible to run into wrong type assumptions, and I’d say type coercion and null/undefined access make up a fairly large percentage of non-logic errors. You can entirely prevent those using Typescript, which is why it’s so useful.

              Static type analysis is always a good idea if you’re writing more than a couple lines. IMO Python is the worst offender with its kwargs etc. - discoverability and testability is just so bad if you’re following common Python idioms.

  • Xylight‮@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t like calling myself a JS/TS dev but my biggest project that I currently work on is written in it, so I had to try it.

    16/28. I mean it’s incredible how I can throw a diabolical amount of variations of formatting at it and somehow get valid dates.