Show newer

@vaporeon_ in the smash community it is a (now that you mention it very strange) convention to use that sort of notation to describe matchup probability

when someone says a matchup is "+1" they're saying that "if player A using character A fights player B using character B and both players are of equal skill level, then I estimate that player A should win 55% of the time"

+2 is ~60% of the time

+0/even is ~50%

etc

This isn't "official", it's very loose terminology and people have their own interpretations of it but this is usually close to how most people think of it

ive had this reaction image up and loaded for a while now but unfortunately i usually find it enjoyable and life-affirming to interact with yall so i never have the opportunity to use this.

not enough for playing videogames to out of the question but just enough to still be annoying

Show thread

so it's one of the slight-headache-the-entire-day type days

@Lady @Satsuma it is so cool that i had a fundamental misunderstanding of a language i loved that is really cool

@Lady @Satsuma okay let me clarify my confusion then. If I have a value of number type I can call Object.getPrototypeOf on that number and get the Number.prototype object.

I can call methods and access properties on the number as well.

In general things we call primitives in JavaScript has property access and is in a prototype chain (although now that I think about it im sure undefined and null don't fit into this).

I was under the impression that values are containers for information that allow property access semantics, and that all values in the language participate in this, and the language makes a very poor decision of overloading the term "object" to simultaneously refer to one of 1) the fundamental container type that (all?) values in JavaScript are 2) non-null types that typeof tells you are "object" 3) instances of ES6 classes

@Lady @Satsuma are there technically some values that aren't objects? I thought it was objects all the way down

@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."

@aescling movie theatres are now playing special messages before the movie starts specifically requesting that the audience does not trash the theatre during the chicken jockey scene

Show older
📟🐱 GlitchCat

A small, community‐oriented Mastodon‐compatible Fediverse (GlitchSoc) instance managed as a joint venture between the cat and KIBI families.