Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
I spent about an hour today doing a factoring experiment, taking a promises-based API and transforming it into a callbacks-based API.
Well no surprise they're isomorphic. When you do the translation, you end up with the same thing with different names.
The promises syntax is slightly more compact. A long distance to go and a lot of introduced complexity for very little gain.
It's like getting nice fat clothes instead of just losing the weight.
I have a philosophy in programming, one I thought was stolen from, but actually mis-attributed to Einstein, who ironically said as much in a lot more words.
This is a basic mathematics thing. They're always looking for a way to find one theorum that encapsulates and makes unnecessaray two or more. A more fundamental truth. The hope is ultimately to have one concise way of saying everything. A Rick and Morty kind of idea. But why do programmers always seem to do the opposite? Solving a problem of too much complexity by adding even more complexity.
I was a math major before I was a programmer, so I find this whole thing super frustrating.
At some point, instigated by Drummer perhaps, I hope we will have a great debate in the JavaScript community where our respected leaders explain to us why we need any of this stuff, and we can't have a language that behaves like all others, where asynchronous bits live underneath the interface that the langauge defines for the programmer.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.