I was interviewing a candidate for a senior UI dev position and I began to ask him stuff about closures, contexts, design patterns and others.

At some point, after failing to respond to most of the questions, the candidate looked at me and said something like: ‘I am amazed. You didn’t have a lot of toys when you were a kid. The PC was your only toy when you were a kid, right??’.

I looked at my junior colleague that was shadowing the interview and we couldn’t believe what the guy was asking. He was extremely serious and he was looking for a way to find an explanation for his failure.

When you have over 10 years experience... and nothing to show for it due to closures, redesigns and private work.

It’s not making my job hunt any easier.

Is it just me who sees this? JS development in a somewhat more complex setting (like vue-storefront) is just a horrible mess.
I have 10+ experience in java, c# and python, and I've never needed more than a a few hours to get into a new codebase, understanding the overall system, being able to guess where to fix a given problem.
But with JS (and also TS for that matter) I'm at my limits. Most of the files look like they don't do anything. There seems to be no structure, both from a file system point of view, nor from a code point of view.
It start with little things like 300 char long lines including various lambdas, closures and ifs with useless variables names, over overly generic and minified method/function names to inconsistent naming of files, classes and basically everything else.
I used to just set a breakpoint somewhere in my code (or in a compiled dependency) wait this it is being hit and go back and forth to learn how the system state changes.
This seems to be highly limited in JS. I didn't find the one way to just being able to debug, everything that is. There are weird things like transpilers, compiler, minifiers, bablers and what not else. There is an error? Go f... yourself ...
And what do I find as the number one tipp all across the internet? Console.log?? are you kidding me, sure just tell me, your kidding me right?
If I would have to describe the JS world in one word, I would use "inconsistency". It's all just a pain in the ass.

I remember when I switcher from VisualStudio/C# to Eclipse/Java I felt like traveling back in time for about 10 years. Everyting seemd so ... old-schoolish, buggy, weird.
When I now switch from java to JS it makes me feel the same way. It's all so highly unproductive, inconsistent, undeterministic, cobbled together.
For one inconveinience the JS communinity seems to like to build huge shitloads of stuff around it, instead of fixing the obvious. And noone seems to see that.
It's like they are all blinded somehow. Currently I'm also trying to implement a small react app based on react-admin. The simplest things to develop and debug are a nightmare. There is so much boilerplate that to write that most people in the internet just keep copying stuff, without even trying to understand what it actually does.
I've always been a guy that tries to understand what the fuck this code actuall does. And for most of the parts I just thing, that the stuff there is useless or could be done in a way more readable way. But instead, all the devs out there just seem to chose the "copy and fix somehow-ish" way.
I'm all in for component-izing stuff. I like encapsulation, I'm a OOP guy by heart. But what react and similar frameworks do is just insane. It's just not right (for some part).
Especially when you have to remember so much stuff that is just mechanics/boilerplate without having any actual "business logical function".

People always say java is so verbose. I don't think it is, there is so few syntax that it almost reads like a prose story. When I look at JS and TS instead, I'm overwhelmed by all the syntax, almost wondering every second line, what the actual fuck this could mean. The boilerplate/logic ration seems way to off ..

So it really makes me wonder, if all you JS devs out there are just so used to that stuff, that you cannot imagine how it could be done better? I still remember my C# days, but I admin that I just got used to java. So I can somehow understand that all. But JS is just another few levels less deeper.
But maybe I'm just lazy and too old ...

And today in Laravel-land, how to take fluent APIs to the utmost consequences.

Better...? Seriously? All your lines got longer and you know have closures to run.

Some time ago, I asked DevRanters if you would use US or UK version of word.

Most of you said, whatever.

I just found case for using both :D

My definition of hell?
Being forced to debug nested callbacks abusing global variables & closures generated from from reflection...

Kids are like closures over us.
We die, but our "scope" lives on.

Tried to write a short article about Javascript IIFE modules, ended up explaining about function block scoping all the way to closures before I eventually get to the IIFE module explanation itself...

I'm really bad at this 😓

I just remembered some of the "harmless" dev-related insults I've received over the years:

1) most recently, I shared a tool with an acquaintance cuz it bears the same name as something he put together a while back. Background: this guy likes to come across as having infinite programming knowledge and brags to his fb pals about being an expert in multiple languages. While trying to make sense of the cryptic docs of the package I sent him, he implies I don't know what the iframe or html5 canvas are. Claims not to elaborate what package does cuz the docs is meant for advanced desktop and mobile devs

It hurt because this is one of few people who know I built suphle, yet thinks so lowly

2) as you can tell from the first point, I share links I consider interesting with relevant contacts. I'm also quite vocal about my (mostly contrarian) takes on occurrences within the dev space that I'm familiar with. One day on the laravel board, this dude is reprimanding me and asks me to take the opinions I read on blogs and tabloids with a pinch of salt, implying I didn't form them independently but was influenced by what was written by some stranger online

It hurt because I expected him to know better. I felt I'd sufficiently proven to have actually built things that informed my school of thought

3) the oldest happened many years ago but I remember it now because the perpetrator called me out of the blue last week. I was teaching his boss, who managed an office but preferred to keep his student status hidden, to avoid being thought incompetent. This caller guy just so turned out to be learning js at the time. Fast forward some years, we all disbanded. He'd landed a dev job and was doing well. So I sent him one of those js gotchas, asking him to explain his answer

After he replied, I told him his answer was close enough but it had more to do with js passing closure arguments by reference. Dude responded that he knew that was the correct answer but wasn't aware I knew what closures meant. That stung me like hell back then. I missed his call and didn't know who owned the contact, so I searched my chats and saw that last interaction. Pain all over again

I'm a C++/Obj-C programmer finding it ludicrously hard to switch to Swift.

I find that the constant ability (leading to very poor programmer code) to reduce syntax and add tokens reduces readability and nowhere is this more apparent that with closures.

I'm working through (to my shame) Ray Wenderlich's Swift course and the closure chapter has this:

PS I loathe K&R as much as I do Swift so it's all in Allman formatting for clarity.

let multiply: (Int, Int) -> Int =
{
(a: Int, b: Int) -> Int in

// do Something else

return a * b
}
Why oh why isn't this more simply and elegantly written as:

let multiply = (a: Int, b: Int) -> Int
{
// do Something else

return a * b
}
The equals sign shows clearly that it's a closure definition assignment, as does the starting 'let'. But this way all of the stupid excesses, like the 'in' keyword, the repetition of the params / return type only this time with useful labels and additional tokens are removed and it looks and reads much more like a regular function and certainly a lot more clearly.

Now I know that with the stupid ability of Swift you can reduce all this down to return $0 * $1, but the point I'm making is that a) that's not as clear and more importantly b) if this closure does something more than just one line of code, then all that complicated stuff - hinted to by the comment '// do Something else' means you can't reduce it to stupid tokens.

So, when you have a clousure that has a lot of stuff going on and you can't reduce it to stupid minimalism, then why isn't is formatted and syntactically better like the suggestion above?

I've mentioned this on the Swift.org (and got banned for criticising Swift) but the suggestions they came up with were 'use type inference' to remove the first set of params / return type and token.

But that still means the param list and return type are NOT on the same line as the declaration and you still need the stupid 'in' keyword!

Is the CS field creating terms for the sake of creating terms?

Someone mentioned a "closure" in another post. I instinctively knew what they meant by that based upon the code I saw. I had heard the term thrown around before, but it had not yet connected in my mind. I wondered why I had not been exposed enough to care.

So I thought: What does C++ have as far as closures?

I found that C++ has lambdas. Those are definitions for function objects. They do not exist at runtime. But a closure does. The analog is you have classes. They are definitions and do not exist at runtime. But instances of classes do. So at runtime the instance is what you are working with. This is the same as lambdas vs closures in C++. The closure is the runtime counterpart. Why a separate term for what essentially is an instance? Is it because it captures data and code? As far as I know the closure is all data that gets passed around that calls a function. So it is essentially an instance of a lambda.

Another term: memoization. I have yet to see this added to any dictionary in online tools like a browser. Is the term so specific that nobody cares to add it? I mean these are tools programmers use all the time.

My guess is these terms originated a long time ago and I have just not been exposed to the contexts for these terms enough. It just seems like I feel like I have been in the field a long time. But a lot of terms seem alien to me. I also have never seen these terms used at work. Many of the devs I work with actively avoid CS specific terms to not confuse our electrical coworkers. My background started in electrical. So maybe I just didn't do enough CS in college.

Today I was asked a question on JavaScript regarding the difference between normal `for` loop and a `map` function on an array with regards to closures. Can anyone help me understand? #javascript #interview

You can say you know a computer language to a decent level when you can in fact make useful programs with it.

For example, I can say I know JavaScript to a basic level. I know its basic core functionality by heart (which can't be said for some people I know), such as:

- it manipulates the DOM, the DOM has Element, Nodes, TextNodes (all to be found on W3C documents with its own specs)
- useful functions are:
getElementById()
getElementsByClassName()
Also knowing that these return either HTMLElementCollection or NodeCollection because you have to iterate over it differently then
- element.textContent
- == and ===
- dynamic typing
- closures
- avoid global variables
- nodes have parentNodes
- isNaN, undefined
- arr.push()
- arguments don't have explicit types defined
- etc.

Using this knowledge I built an antispam script for a particular server. It's good to know the model of a language, that it sits in your head and that you can use and understand the constructs when you want and how you want.

My god, I just had to use a very ugly hack involving HTML generation via string concatenation, passing a function as a parameter and closures.

Now I appreciate languages that achieve such things naturally even more.

Have this iOS maniac/UI guy/hustler at my office. (Refers to my first Rant,he's the fucker who always try to shove his iPhone to my face.) Hats off to him for knowing how to generate passive income and his hustling skill. But I hate that fucker. He always like to start a debate. He's always doing his sidejobs all the time. He sells staff online(even fidget spinner). He also does wedding photo shoots. Heard from a friend, he's a mediocre photographer but gets client by giving his potential clients lower prices than his competitors. He got a few connections and somehow always doing websites for his own client by going to codepen and copy pasting JavaScript from here and there. He doesn't know shit about programming. That fucker doesn't even know about closures. He literally doesn't know shit. Yet try to debate about with us regarding programming (wtf?) Always trying to get us to help him with his side paid jobs -when he encountered an error,he will immediately bug us- sometimes would interrupt us while we are busy with the company's stuff. If we don't help, he would slightly mock by saying things like "it's ok...I understand you guys are not that experienced yet..etc". The senior dev was pissed off the other day and emailed a super detailed complaint to the HR.
Note : He gets paid more by his photoshooting jobs on the weekend, he's only at this job for his future citizenship application. That fucker. He's the type of fucker that will definitely gets rich but gets hated by everyone.

How do you feel about devs that love closures & overloads to an almost abusive extent?

A funny quote and almost a true fact.

"Understanding closures, is like when Neo sees The Matrix for the first time".

YDKJS 'scope & closures'

Opinion | According to you, how impressive is it for a high schooler to submit a "general purpose scripting language that supports Object Orientation, closures, higher-order funcs." as a project for college admission given that the applicant implemented it from scratch and you know that hard work!!! ?

I was just asked to make a method for the "logical or" (aka "||") in JavaScript "because it's used multiple times".

How dense do you have to be to argue against "it creates additional closures" and "creating functions for built-in operators is an anti-pattern".

Come on!!! At least it's my last week here, I'll be done with this soon enough.

Why did I go broke?

Because every time I tried to cash in my promises, I’d end up nullifying my income with undefined deductions! I thought I could get by on short functions and quick closures, but in the end, I found myself callbacked into a corner with no scope for improvement.

I tried to debug my financial situation, but my stack overflowed with deferred payments, and I couldn’t even parse where all my money was going. The compiler of my life just kept throwing unexpected "expenses" errors.

In a final attempt, I refactored my entire approach, renaming myself Async to buy some time, but it was too late. My funds were hoisted to the global scope, and before I knew it, I was reduced to Boolean poverty.

Now, I live my life in strict mode, always awaiting the day I’ll finally get a return on my investment... but deep down, I know I’m just an object in a mutable state.

P.S : I'm a JS DEV

in 2023, swift still doesn't have a tracing GC, and they are still using reference counting to decide when to deallocate an instance, surprise! what's even worse is closures are everywhere and the default way to define a closure make it possible to keep a reference to variables in the parent scope.

Do you know any real life example of closures ??.. where I can use them in real world .