4

1. Test coverage not consisting of flaky brittle tests
2. Native type checking in JS (v8 engine)
3. Less meetings.

Comments
  • 1
    @irene it’s logical enough. What jumps out at you?
  • 2
    @irene weak typing agreed. But all of these are present in n-number of languages :) I think JS gets needlessly bashed. When used properly it’s great (much like any other tool).

    Although I’m still impartial to the idea of replacing everything with erlang ;)
  • 1
    @irene unless you are doing any gpu (cuda) work which is most definitely not imperative.

    Again being someone who codes JS almost daily for a living, I have yet to really feel it as inelegant any more than other languages I’ve had the pleasure of making acquaintance with.

    But to each their own.
  • 2
    Fewer meetings!

    (Sorry I'll switch pedant mode off)
  • 1
    @Robinha haha good catch, thank you. We should have a meeting to discuss your findings.
  • 0
    @irene build in type checking:
    1. typeof
    2. ===
    3. Object.prototype.toString.call(yourMysteryObject)
    4. yourMysteryObject.constructor

    There’re so many ways. So many... 🤦‍♂️
  • 0
    @sunfishcc unfortunately only runtime :)
Add Comment