Skip to main content

We know JavaScript is weird... enough already!

So it looks like JavaScript is close to being considered a "real" language nowadays. There are frameworks which allow you to do MVC (like Backbone.js), you can use it on the server (with Node.js) and you can even use it to interact with datastores (via MongoDB).

So why is it that almost every job posting you see for a JavaScript gig and/or every interview you go to that has a JavaScript component, asks you to interpret/debug (without using a browser) some esoteric fault of JavaScript that you probably wouldn't run into in a 100 years because you actually write decent JS?

Like
  var cities = ["NY", "SF"];
  cities.length = 1;
  console.log(cities); // outputs ["NY"]

or 


  var a = 1 + 1 + "1"; // equals "21"
  var b = "1" + 1 + 1; // equals "111"

It's as if they are trying to say to you "Look at that piece of crap language you are programming in! You must be an idiot!" while at the same time offering you a job in said language whilst wanting to build up their systems in it.

Also, there are so many of these quirks in JS (and web development in general) that just because you may not have seen one, it does not mean that you are a bad programmer and you don't know JavaScript.

Instead, ask them to do FizzBuzz at a console with a text editor and a browser (whilst looking over their shoulder to see that they are not cheating) and really look at how well their code is written. Ask them to generate a recursive function. Ask them to create an instance of an object and add some functionality to it via prototype.

In short, ask them to do something they do in real life and what you probably want them to do for you.

Don't remind them how shitty JS is, believe me, they know this more than you.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Freezing Gems

What is a gem and why would you want to freeze it?

In Ruby, there are times when you want to access pieces of functionality that other people of written (3rd party libraries) and you normally have 2 options. You can install a plug in or install a gem. Normally the method you use is determined by which ever is made available by the author.

Gems are installed on the host machine and are pretty handy when you want to run things in the command line or else across lots of projects, but their downside is that if you use a gem in a Rails project there is no automatic publishing mechanism when you deploy your site. You will need to log onto the remote host machine and install the gem manually.

Plugins are specific to Rails and are similar to gems in that they are also 3rd party libraries. However they are associated with your Rails project as opposed to your machine so they will get posted to the server on a regular deploy.

Freezing a gem is the process of transforming a gem into a plug in. Essen…

Unit/Functional Testing RubyAMF

One of my current projects is using RubyAMF to communicate with Flash (http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubyamf/). On the whole this is really nice because it allows you to transfer Ruby objects directly to ActionScript ones (as opposed to translating the object into XML, sending the XML and then recreating the object in ActionScript).
However, Rails does not provide a built in transport mechanism for AMF, so we cannot run functional testing directly on the data call (as we could for an XML or HTML transport layer). This is a show stopper for a lot of people (Rails w/o Unit testing = a big mess of trouble when something goes wrong).
We can though serve both the HTML and the AMF formats depending on the request format. This means that we can test the object instantiation logic and make sure there are no errors in the controllers (though we cannot check the actual format of the data being served). In the controller, instead of rendering AMF alone, do the following respond_to do |format|

Comparing Rails' Active Record Pattern with Phoenix/Elixir/Ecto

Rails has a very well established Active Record pattern for dealing with the database. You have an Active Record model which maps to the database table, the schema of the model comes directly from the database schema and you place your model specific methods on the Active Record model. This file is also where you set your model relationships (e.g. has_many, has_one, belongs_to). Your instance of the model has all the methods built in.

In Ecto/Phoenix it's a little different. First of all, the database schema doesn't automatically map to the "model". In fact we don't really have models (as Elixir is a functional paradigm). What happens in one file in Rails, happens in essentially two (or more). You have a schema file (where you have to list out all the attributes and relationships). Using the schema file, your "instance" is essentially a data structure (with no methods on it). If you want to transform the data on your struct, you would use a context modu…