hi @Lady i just got rage-baited by some very poor javascript criticism would you also like to be annoyed by it
@wallhackio @Lady she’s playing Leyendas Pokémon: Arceus but i will read it to her if you want
@Lady @Satsuma Here, have a transcription of the most appalling part of the video:
Author: "And why is nearly everything an object? Why is Strings objects? Why are numbers objects? They're just numbers. Like I get that it's for method but does NaN need to be an object?"
[screen shows author using the node.js REPL calling the valueOf method of NaN]
Author: "Why would anyone want to get the value of something that explicitly states it isn't a number?"
[Cut to screenshot of freecodecamp.org's description of JavaScript which claims that "JavaScript is not a class-based object-oriented language".]
Author: "Any many argue that JavaScript isn't object-oriented."
[cut to screenshot of towardsdatascience.com's description of JavaScript which claims that "Nearly everything in JavaScript is an object".]
Author: "Looks pretty-object oriented to me... And why is that functions are also classes? That's what [ES6] classes are for."
@wallhackio @Satsuma honestly thinking everything is an object is imagining javascript to be simpler and more consistent than it actually is
@wallhackio @Lady @Satsuma are you joking? object is one of the fundamental types, distinct from other fundamental types like number
@wallhackio @Lady @Satsuma there are java-like wrappers that are distinct from the types that they wrap