lewisje
6/6/2015 4:13:00 AM
On Friday, June 5, 2015 at 1:02:25 PM UTC-4, Stefan Ram wrote:
> James Lewis <lewisje@gmail.com> writes:
> >I've watched it, and it's extremely slow-paced,
> >without even getting much into the weird parts.
>
> Maybe you can find the time to give us some examples
> of what you deem to be the weird parts of JavaScript?
>
> (BTW: If you saw »The First 3.5 Hours«, it is possible
> that the video will come to the actual weird parts in
> later hours.)
The way the course was marketed, it sounded like it would presume knowledge of the basics and get right into the oddities, but it went through some basic stuff at a very slow pace; I'd need to re-watch it (and stay awake the whole time) to give a blow-by-blow, but I guess some notable weird parts would include the memoization pattern, short-circuit function re-definition, and (albeit more about browser bugs than core JS) the perils of named function expressions.
I also just looked through the description and outline on Udemy again, and most of it looks like it's covering the basics; somehow I doubt that "objects and object literals, function expressions, prototypical [sic] inheritance," etc. are *advanced*.
At least it's not like a video series on Learnable I once watched ("JS Functions") in which the host called the return statement a "method" and a "function" and thought that it needed a pair of parentheses after the "return" keyword, and in which he thought a set of expressions separated by the comma operator and wrapped in parentheses constituted a "list" data-type, analogous to but different from an array, just because the syntax looks similar. I sent him a bunch of DMs on Twitter about it because I didn't know a better way to contact him, and he took my criticisms well.
(Then again, at least that video series was paced quickly enough to keep me from falling asleep.)