The Official Funny Stuff Thread™
-
-
-
-
-
@da-Doctah said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Cole Haan ... "warm heart".
This is the funny stuff thread. Bad pun thread is .
-
@DoctorJones said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
For people east of Berlin it's funny in a different way.
-
-
Speaking of Steven Seagal
-
@hungrier well, then.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Still too soon
-
@El_Heffe said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
IT'S THE CIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRCLE OF LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIFE
-
@dangeRuss said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Still too soon
Ikea used to sell this paper lamp in several sizes under the model name STORM.
I always felt a better name for it would be BØTTÜL.
-
@hungrier said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Speaking of Steven Seagal
He's pretty close to looking like he's got the wrong number of chromosomes when he's running.
-
@Carnage said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@hungrier said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Speaking of Steven Seagal
He's pretty close to looking like he's got the wrong number of chromosomes when he's running.
..... Oh, right, this isn't the Garage...
-
@da-Doctah said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
I always felt a better name for it would be BØTTÜL.
BÖTTUL
; Swedish doesn't use eitherØ
orÜ
and all IKEA product names are Swedish words (or names). ExceptFLASKA
orKARAFF
would be both more likely.
-
@dkf Actually, Swedish does use the letter
Ü
in one word:MÜSLI
-
@DoctorJones said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
Amid a growing fuel crisis in the UK, the BBC send a reporter called Phil McCann to get live footage from a local forecourt.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
*edit I could post his feed all day for likes but just visit yourself
-
-
-
@DogsB What in the everloving fuck?
-
@Rhywden Garbage in, garbage out.
I can understand how
![]
becomesfalse
andfalse+false
becomes zero, but I'm having trouble understanding why[]+![]
becomes"false"
; I suspect it's an empty string concatenated with"false"
, but I can't say I quite see why.I see
![] + []
also produces"false"
, so maybe I got that the wrong way around. But,![]
-- >false
,+[]
-->0
,false + 0
* -->0
.*I know, not the same kind of +
Spoiler alert
For some reason I expected
([]).toString()
to be'[object Object]'
or similar, but it is instead([]).join(',') === ''
which is perfectly reasonable and I wouldn't have it any other way. So that explains it.
-
@Rhywden obligatory video link about this
-
@Rhywden said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@DogsB What in the everloving fuck?
Indexing the 0th element of the string "false".
-
@Zecc It's s all the way down:
> Boolean([]) true > Boolean(![]) false > [] + [] "" > ![] + [] "false" > [] + ![] "false" > false + [] "false" > false + ![] 0
-
@hungrier of all there are, you chose the least example.
Boolean([])
is irrelevant because[]
will never turn into a bool unless you use!
, which gives youfalse
that behaves exactly like any otherfalse
. And the addition rules are simple. Adding numbers adds numbers. Adding bools converts them to numbers first and then adds as numbers. Everything else is string concatenation.
-
-
Having
null
in Java has been called the million dollar mistake. So of course JavaScript must and have two “nil” values,undefined
andnull
. As if it ever made a ι of sense.Unlike strongly, statically, typed Java, the dynamically typed JavaScript seems to need some “top” value, so it couldn't have neither. But it could have only have one like the other well behaved dynamically typed languages like Perl (to compare it to something already established when JavaScript was created) do.
-
@Bulb the original idea was that
null
, while an empty value, is still a valid value and should behave like any other value - because that's what programmers expect and need for many use cases. But there must be a real empty value that represents actual nothing, the result of accessing a variable that was never set, as opposed to one that was intentionally set to null - henceundefined
. And it would be all fine, except JS programmers started treatingundefined
like any other value, passing it around and writing to object fields and whatnot. And the JS standard was extended to accomodate that. So there are now three kinds of nothingness: thenull
, theundefined
, and the actual case of variable or object field never being set, which is different from being set toundefined
.
-
@Gąska saner languages just treat that as an error instead of adding several
undefined
values.
-
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Zecc ..... Why can I see the edit history on a deleted post?
-
I don’t JSfuck but even I can tell you could just
(![]+[])[+[]]
instead of([]+![])[![]+![]]
-
@Gąska said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Bulb the original idea was that
null
, while an empty value, is still a valid value and should behave like any other value - because that's what programmers expect and need for many use cases.That was the idea, but it was as stupid back then as it is now. Perl was well established when JS was created and it only has one
undefined
and no othernull
and nobody really minds.But there must be a real empty value that represents actual nothing, the result of accessing a variable that was never set, as opposed to one that was intentionally set to null - hence
undefined
. And it would be all fine, except JS programmers started treatingundefined
like any other value, passing it around and writing to object fields and whatnot.Because that's actually the only sane thing to do. That's what they are used to from the saner languages that only have one nothing.
And the JS standard was extended to accomodate that. So there are now three kinds of nothingness: the
null
, theundefined
, and the actual case of variable or object field never being set, which is different from being set toundefined
.Which just shows that
null
should have never been created in the first place. There should have been oneundefined
and the language should have allowed distinguishing between a field not existing and field being set to undefined. For which there was at least one precedent, Perl.@topspin said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Gąska saner languages just treat that as an error instead of adding several
undefined
values.Some languages make accessing non-existent variables an error (I didn't think Python predates JS, but it does), others automatically create them (Perl). But even that does not require several undefined values.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Zecc ..... Why can I see the edit history on a deleted post?
My edit history is public. I guess deleting is technically an edit?
-
@Zecc said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
@Zecc ..... Why can I see the edit history on a deleted post?
My edit history is public. I guess deleting is technically an edit?
No it's a flag. I blame our custom post history plugin... again....
-
@Bulb said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
I didn't think Python predates JS, but it does
How popular were Python versions before 2.0? I think I first heard of Python around version 2.1, so we were well in the 2000s by then.
The browser wars introduced me to JavaScript earlier than that.But at the same time "CWI Python" sounds familiar, which would put the timeframe in the late 1990s
-
@Zecc said in The Official Funny Stuff Thread™:
How popular were Python versions before 2.0?
According to wikipedia, first Python was 1991, first JavaScript 1995 (only about half a year after Java!) and Python 2 in 2000. I think RedHat used the pre-2.0 Python, but it was fairly unheard of anywhere else. The most common scripting language in the Unix world back then was Perl, which existed since 1988 and was 5.000 also since 1995 (about the same as Java).
… either way, OOP was still hot and malleable and nobody understood how to do it properly nor why it's not such a stellar idea as it looked.