Currently I am learning how to program windows 8 metro apps using Javascript.
I have some prior experience with javascript, but only with the stuff js was actually designed for: small snippets embedded in HTML code. This is the first time I am developing a complete application in js. And I got to say: the more I learn about it the more I hate it.
-no type safety
-all errors except for the most trivial syntax errors can only be found at runtime when the code in question is executed
-a mistyped member variable of an object, is even silent at runtime, because you needn't declare public member variables of classes, even when using 'use strict'.
-OOP is a joke. Most features which should be standard repertoire of an OOP language are only available through nasty hacks. Most annoying flaw so far: event handlers can't call instance methods*. wtf? how am I supposed to create a proper MVC pattern, when my controllers can't be instanced?
Why do people keep promoting this shit? Sure, you do everything nowadays in a webbrowser, and in a web application, javascript is the only standardized, platform-independent way to have any logic in the client. So you don't get around using JS when you have a web application. But why do people promote this abomination of a language for areas where much more viable alternatives exist? Like stand-alone client applications (windows 8 metro apps) and even server applications (NodeJS).
*They can call them, but they are executed in a static context, not the context of the object, which means that you can't access any member variables.
Name:
Anonymous2011-09-29 3:43
>>38
95% of coding is mainteance of legacy crap. You have no choice.
I had a window in the foreground covering the "script" part in the thread title. I was like "yeah, well, who doesn't". Then I gave focus to the browser window and was offended by the full title.
Formally, assuming the axiom of choice, the cardinality of a set X is the least ordinal α such that there is a bijection between X and α. This definition is known as the von Neumann cardinal assignment. If the axiom of choice is not assumed we need to do something different. The oldest definition of the cardinality of a set X (implicit in Cantor and explicit in Frege and Principia Mathematica) is as the class [X] of all sets that are equinumerous with X. This does not work in ZFC or other related systems of axiomatic set theory because if X is non-empty, this collection is too large to be a set. In fact, for X ≠ ∅ there is an injection from the universe into [X] by mapping a set m to {m} × X and so by limitation of size, [X] is a proper class. The definition does work however in type theory and in New Foundations and related systems. However, if we restrict from this class to those equinumerous with X that have the least rank, then it will work (this is a trick due to Dana Scott: it works because the collection of objects with any given rank is a set).
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 8:09
In the Indian work on the theory of sets, two basic types of infinite numbers are distinguished. On both physical and ontological grounds, a distinction was made between asaṃkhyāta ("countless, innumerable") and ananta ("endless, unlimited"), between rigidly bounded and loosely bounded infinities.
In languages that do not have greatest and least elements, but do allow overloading of relational operators, it is possible for a programmer to create the greatest and least elements
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 9:39
Few full derivations of complex mathematical theorems from set theory have been formally verified, however, because such formal derivations are often much longer than the natural language proofs mathematicians commonly present. One verification project, Metamath, includes derivations of more than 10,000 theorems starting from the ZFC axioms and using first order logic.
The axiom of choice is avoided in some varieties of constructive mathematics, although there are varieties of constructive mathematics in which the axiom of choice is embraced.
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 11:09
Errett Bishop argued that the axiom of choice was constructively acceptable, saying
"A choice function exists in constructive mathematics, because a choice is implied by the very meaning of existence."
The start of the summer season isn't too far off now, so let's have a new thread.
I would like to start by saying:
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 13:38
Doing it in a practice match is only a quick way though, the jp wiki mentions another slower way, just take a single ship fleet to 1-1 and return to base after the first battle and keep doing that until it sparkles.
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 14:24
Hello wizard Yuuka.
Name:
Anonymous2013-08-31 15:08
11) 不思議の大魔境: "大魔境" is translated as Pandemonium in the game, so it is "Mystery Pandemonium".
It is really hard. It becomes harder latter, when you can't kill high defense monsters like Kaguya. I couldn't beat it yet.
You should take a look at meiboscript. A language based on javascript using great stuff like libraries based on float while the language itself does not support float.
The classic example used is that of the infinite hotel paradox, also called Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel. Suppose you are an innkeeper at a hotel with an infinite number of rooms. The hotel is full, and then a new guest arrives. It's possible to fit the extra guest in by asking the guest who was in room 1 to move to room 2, the guest in room 2 to move to room 3, and so on, leaving room 1 vacant. We can explicitly write a segment of this mapping:
1 ↔ 2
2 ↔ 3
3 ↔ 4
...
n ↔ n + 1
...
Name:
Anonymous2013-09-01 11:11
However, the earliest attestable accounts of mathematical infinity come from Zeno of Elea (c. 490 BCE? – c. 430 BCE?), a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher of southern Italy and member of the Eleatic School founded by Parmenides. Aristotle called him the inventor of the dialectic. He is best known for his paradoxes, described by Bertrand Russell as "immeasurably subtle and profound".