@vaporeon_ software eggineering poisons your brain
@wallhackio Are you referring to yourself or to me or to us all?
@vaporeon_ I'm referring to anyone who writes code for money instead of writing code for fun
@vaporeon_ this is not a slight on Holly. i hope that is clear. she does code golf so you know she actually likes coding for the hell of it
@wallhackio @vaporeon_ oh yeah all this goes out the window when you're golfing. sometimes it's fun to let loose and write some horseshit
@monorail @vaporeon_ my worst code practices occur when i hack a solution to a challenging data structures/algorithms problem
@wallhackio How can you have bad code practices when there's no such thing as good Java code, it's all terrible
@vaporeon_ I've done DS&A problems in JavaScript and written some nightmarish oneliners doing that
@wallhackio Need to see
@vaporeon_ I know how this is gonna go. I will show it to you and then you'll be like, wait this is cool I like it :)
@vaporeon_ oooooh I could have done for (var min = Infinity, j = 1, res; j <= nums[i]; ++j) res = 1 + jump(nums, i + j, gorp), min = res < min ? res : min;
javascript variables declared with var and not block scoped, so min
is available outside of the for loop teehee
@aescling @vaporeon_ ....it runs faster with this change
@wallhackio @vaporeon_ if you look into the semantic diffurences between for
with let
and var
scoped variables, this is not surpurrising; the furmer is surpurrisingly complicated. const
allows fur some optimizations over let
though iirc
@aescling @vaporeon_ with let
the algo ran the test cases ~700ms and with var
it shaved ~100ms
@wallhackio @vaporeon_ that's awful i love it lol