JavaScript await was rogue rogue along
codedynasty.devSo are we going to define the word "rogue" here?
"uses duck typing"?
So we're all just going to ignore the fact that the title says rogue rogue?
I almost mentioned it but the article page doesn't have that typo in the title and I'm too busy asking for clarification about the text.
I almost didn't mention it but I'm petty.
I'm really sorry this is my contribution/comment atm, I'm very interested in this stuff, but I am having a hell of a time reading this. Even if you keep the font I can't figure if some increased letter-spacing would help, really though I need some line-spacing and paragraph margin bottom for the love of god it's a contrasty text wall blur and I can't focus :( I'm getting old I guess, coding since the late 90s, and here we are finally the point my optometrist warned me about that I'll need glasses soon lol
Not just the formatting, but also - why does it start with this sentence:
> Don’t tell me you don’t know await is rogue too, jess christ.
What is that supposed to mean? "rogue"? "rogue too"? "await" is rogue, but something else is also rogue - what is that something else?
"Jess Christ" - why is the author (apparently?) exasperated at the very start of this page?
Why does someone write like this? Apparently not with the goal of being understood.
As always, mdn has the best javascript documentation, which clarifies the reason this mechanism exists and the fact it actually takes two callbacks:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...
I know it’s rogue when it fails . . . await for it. . jslint.com