Programmer Humor

32266 readers

105 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

218

"☹️".reverse() == "🙂" (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Today I found out that this is valid JS:

const someString = "test string";
console.log(someString.toString());

[+] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (5 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I dint know many OO languages that don’t have a useless toString on string types.

Well, that's just going to be one of those "it is what it is" things in an OO language if your base class has a toString()-equivalent. Sure, it's probably useless for a string, but if everything's an object and inherits from some top-level Object class with a toString() method, then you're going to get a toString() method in strings too. You're going to get a toString() in everything; in JS even functions have a toString() (the output of which depends on the implementation):

In a dynamically typed language, if you know that everything can be turned into a string with toString() (or the like), then you can just call that method on any value you have and not have to worry about whether it'll hurl at runtime because eg. Strings don't have a toString because it'd technically be useless.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)