Pop quiz. What do you think perl does with "5" + "information". The answer may surprise you. Here's a hint, it actually casts "information" to a number because the first three letters match a defined numerical value.
I did not know that. And I think I just threw up a little in my mouth now.
a==b, b==c, would never presume a==c. It's never true in real-world business, so I'd never want it to be true in business programming.
It's a tautology in mathematics (known as the transitive property of equality) and it should be a tautology in any programming language. If a language gets this wrong, that's a major flaw in the language's design. (Which is not to say that the language isn't still useful. It's just confusing as hell is all.)
Stop reading random documentation.
It's not random documentation. It's one of several bookmarks I keep around that I pull out whenever anyone tries to say that JavaScript is simple.
This wasn't a bad idea at the time, because most people wouldn't try going thew the back door that they don't know about,
It was still a bad idea then. It's just that there were a lot fewer script kiddies and bots looking for back doors and exploits back then than there are now.
Are you insane?
This made me laugh. That was my reaction as well.
But javascript is dead-simple.
Yes, so simple. http://dorey.github.io/JavaScr...
I suspect there is more interest in this than in you whining about how you don't care.
We don't care that you don't care.
I didn't whine about how I didn't care, nor did I ever say that I didn't care.
I asked how it was "news for nerds." Because unless I'm missing something, it isn't.
Now STFU.
Yeah. Thanks for that intelligent commentary.
This is interesting news, but what is of interest to nerds about it that wouldn't be of interest to anyone?
Am I missing something here or is Slashdot being stupid about story selection again?
The arrested was meant to send a message to Thailand's online community.
Come on,
Keyword: "transclusion".
Ain't nobody got time for that.
Y'know, from that video. You've seen it. Can't be bothered to find a link.
In Objective-C, you should only throw exceptions on programming errors. And there's no need to catch them, because you ought to fix the code.
Nonsense. That is what assertions are for. Assertions are not meant to be caught, and should be used to throw an (uncaught) exception upon detection of a programming error, i.e., an internal consistency check. Regular exceptions, on the other hand, are for handling exceptional cases encountered in the process of execution (such as file-not-found or unsupported-format).
Swift just makes it a bit stronger. No exceptions.
They will probably add exceptions in 1.1 or 2.0. They're pretty imporant.
Apple can definitely deploy the new language effectively, but I'm not sure it solves any problems.
The problem it solves is Objective-C having a steep learning curve and, more importantly, people having a kneejerk reaction to its odd syntax.
In other words, Swift will have a wider appeal to people than Objective-C. And that means more developers for iOS, which in turns means more money for Apple.
Overload -- core meltdown sequence initiated.
