guys is javascript that bad? i have been thinking about

File: c4jt321.png (310KB, 580x282px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 580x282px

>>61646858
TypeScript is actually decent if you have a good IDE. I'd suggest trying that.

I like dynamic typing, but JavaScript runtime type checking works like pic related.

It's not that it's a bad language per se... however it has a number of bad properties that make it not an ideal choice for general purpose computing. If you need to do front end web development, throw all the JavaScript you want at the problem. If you're making a server-side application, consider other options. If you're making a desktop or mobile application... don't use JS. We've had enough of this shit using up more resources than necessary just because webdevs can't be bothered to learn something new.

>>61647041
This guy knows what's up

JavaScript is a hacky language (iife, revelation "pattern", etc), but a necessary evil as of now.

I'd get to Typescript as soon as possible tho, more and more libraries are starting to support it, it's a much more predictable language, with good IDE support.

>>61646858
My job has me use a javascript physics engine to simulate the company's structures

As long as you don't do that you should be ok

File: dylan.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>61646858
Javascript is like bash on steroids. You can do all kinds of hacky shit with it. Which is fantastic if you want to hack some shit out. It's a swiss army knife - hardly the best tool for anything, but a decent tool for many things.

With proper practices you can make good quality software in various arenas. Web development being one of them. Small personal tools is another.

As soon as you need to start doing major enterprise stuff, the cost of using JS is not worth the reward. You spend more time working around the language than programming. The language is getting better and better thanks to mass adoption but...you can only put so much lipstick on a pig.