8 replies

1. Matt Panaro 8 min later

   @zachleat I'm actually a big fan of this: it has a negative `wat` factor. It has to return a string, and it does; and there's nothing at all to join, so there's nothing at all in the string: it's just empty. If only the rest of the language were as predictable & consistent 😛

   1. Zach Leatherman 12 min later

      @eigen we love a predictable string

      1. Matt Panaro 36 min later

         @zachleat in this language, we love a predictable ·anything· 😝

2. cthos 🐱 1 hr later

   @zachleat https://262.ecma-international.org/#sec-array.prototype.join

   Because R gets set to '' before it starts a loopin over values and gets returned at the end regardless. :D

3. Blake Watson 2 hr later

   @zachleat

   1. Chris Henrick 2 hr later

      @bw @zachleat I have similar vibes about [].every(() => {}) or [].every((value) => value) and guess what those both evaluate to?

      1. Blake Watson 2 hr later

         @clhenrick @zachleat I feel like I just fixed a bug at work the other day related to this. It evaluates to true, doesn't it?

   2. spartanatreyu 4 hr later

      @bw @zachleat Wait until you go down the rabbit hole of Church Numerals, Lambda Calculus and other related calculi.

      This is a pretty good initial eye-opener:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcVA8Nj6HEo

      There's also some videos of folks who will take an extremely basic programming "environment" where code and data are the same, and bootstrap a language out of it.