0
1

[–] WhiteFraternity 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I immediately thought, "They're probably just doing !(null<0)," saw that he was launching into a bunch of irrelevant crap, scrolled to the bottom, and confirmed my suspicion. This article is like the now-ubiquitous jew media news-article-inflated-into-poz-loaded-mini-human-interest-piece applied to programming.

0
0

[–] Marcellina620694 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Hey, guys!1dIlc9kX6

0
1

[–] badbear 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

They really ought to fix that, but no doubt something depends on it being broken like that.

0
0

[–] natehigger44 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

When WebAssembly finally gets GC interop, JavaScript may as well not exist. It's a tragedy that some people still think it's anything but a shit language.

0
0

[–] 055d764559 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This sucks. The most consistent null I know is SQL's null, which seems to represent "unknown". unknown >=0 is unknown. SQL works that way. This weirdness all comes from asserting a known value when the value is actually unknown.