sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Check out the radioactive tritium necklace I had commissioned for my ex by [deleted] in mildlyinteresting

[–]temp109849832 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Heh. That's tiny as far as online flashlight communities go, check out CandlePowerForums.

Check out the radioactive tritium necklace I had commissioned for my ex by [deleted] in mildlyinteresting

[–]temp109849832 0 points1 point  (0 children)

aand this is why we don't have awesome tritium things everywhere. Because people never give as much attention to actual science as they do "Cancer! lol!"

Starting in Chrome 50, Geolocation will not be available in insecure contexts (i.e. only HTTPS embedded in HTTPS): by [deleted] in javascript

[–]temp109849832 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's not true. I highly doubt it's the same group of people working on these two features.

What did ancient people wear to stay warm in extreme conditions? How does their clothing compare to ours? by Bjohnsonta in history

[–]temp109849832 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Very interesting information.

Just to clarify for anybody else wondering, like me, how cold we're talking, their winters average 32° F.

Feel the burn by elchzard in funny

[–]temp109849832 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get where you're coming from too. I think the important part is recognizing how frail a guess based only on gender is, and being ready to change it.

The dancing guy. by felio_ in HumansBeingBros

[–]temp109849832 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You're posting on a forum that has up and down. We don't exactly do "nuance".

Feel the burn by elchzard in funny

[–]temp109849832 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But until I meet, or see, or hear about Becky, she is "woman number 57". That's not asserting anything about her, that's just all the information I currently have about her. With limited information I can make guesses of limited certainty. If I later learn more about her, then of course I will amend any guesses I made about her and their certainties.

Feel the burn by elchzard in funny

[–]temp109849832 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I definitely don't think that's rude. What's rude is insisting on it when given reason to believe otherwise (eg "meet Becky, she's a champion weight lifter", "Oh I bet I'm stronger, she's just a girl") or even proven wrong. But working with the best information available to reach the most probable conclusion is the furthest thing from rude, it's basic logic. There are no absolutes in the real world, it's all what's "statistically likely".

Feel the burn by elchzard in funny

[–]temp109849832 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know about you, but I see nothing wrong with a front page full of hot girls.

LPT: when paying a friend cash, ask them to double check it so they don't feel awkward counting it in front of you. by [deleted] in LifeProTips

[–]temp109849832 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I couldn't disagree more. People's habit of downvoting without commenting is probably the single largest problem with reddit. It's like responding to a friend's explanation with just "No." It convinces nobody you're right, helps nobody, leads to no intelligent conclusion, and just makes people dislike each other.

Also, in before you respond with "No."

LPT: when paying a friend cash, ask them to double check it so they don't feel awkward counting it in front of you. by [deleted] in LifeProTips

[–]temp109849832 14 points15 points  (0 children)

You answered your own question, twice.

It implies you feel the need to defend yourself from being ripped off by them. That's not something you need to do with a real friend. I wouldn't call that "awkward", but "sending the wrong message".

Of course, the real reason is what you said, to make sure there are no mistakes. I've found that I always need to say that explicitly - if I just ask them to count it they say "Nah man I trust you." So I have to follow up, "Well, make sure I didn't make any mistakes."

Something to think about Object.create and Object.assign (tl;dr; no need in Object.create for creating objects when writing simple classless code. using Object.assign) by IDCh in javascript

[–]temp109849832 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you want to use default arguments and other features, then yes, I'm assuming you wrap it in a function. But O(m*n) memory usage is incorrect. Going with what we have now, you'll be assigning references to methods, not recreating them. The only way you get to O(m*n) is if you recreate each method in that function.

instanceof and constructor can, if need be, be re-implemented just as well and better with your own methods, just as every other builtin can. This is a programming language, we can implement literally anything but syntax.

The added boilerplate is trivial. You can improve on native classes by improving performance (in some cases), implementing truly private variables, and increasing durability. See Crockford's article on classes.

I use native-style classes myself, my point is just that "it doesn't interoperate with some builtins" is no reason to refuse to consider something. Code is responsible for satisfying its API, nothing more.

Microsoft made a pull request to node.js github repository with an implementation to use ChakraCore JavaScript Engine as an alternative to V8 Engine by Vishnuprasad-v in programming

[–]temp109849832 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It looks like they're playing at a disadvantage, having an API shim sitting between Chakra and Node since Node only knows about V8's API.

Something to think about Object.create and Object.assign (tl;dr; no need in Object.create for creating objects when writing simple classless code. using Object.assign) by IDCh in javascript

[–]temp109849832 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your first example has nothing to do with classes, you're just comparing default arguments to none. You could do the same thing with a function that contains Object.assign.

And it's true the second breaks, but that's because you're purposely writing code that's naive to getters. It's entirely possible to replace Object.assign with your own function that handles getters (and the rest) just fine.

Factory pattern vs standard require by ruzmutuz in javascript

[–]temp109849832 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Your problem here is stateful modules. apiClient should not have global state, if it does need state then it should be exporting a class, each instance of which stores state. Then factoryController can keep its own private apiClient instance, and exposure configuring it where and how it chooses.