00:38:41  * AtumT_quit (Remote host closed the connection)
00:45:05  * bradleymeckpart
01:55:03  <dilijev>Probably the wrong place to bring up a non-technical conversation around JS, but I've got a friend who teaches JS as part of a coding academy and is frustrated with how "soft" everything is compared to the other languages they teach as part of the classes, like Ruby. You've got soft types, if you use functions you maybe have problems with this? Can we teach classes or not (do we want to introduce the idea of compat
01:55:03  <dilijev>levels and transpilers or not)?
01:55:08  <dilijev>Any thoughts on teaching JS?
02:58:27  * nobsojoined
02:58:27  * nobsoquit (Client Quit)
03:53:20  * not-an-aardvarkjoined
04:40:44  * jmdyckquit (Quit: Leaving.)
05:07:34  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
05:09:37  * Draggor1joined
05:30:31  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
05:31:15  * Draggor1joined
05:36:26  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
05:37:15  * Draggor1joined
05:37:26  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
06:29:26  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
06:30:17  * Draggor1joined
06:34:57  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
06:35:41  * Draggor1joined
06:48:22  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
06:51:07  * Draggor1joined
06:55:29  <dilijev>Here's a dumb thought. Getting a function to behave the way you want often involves arrow functions. So you either use function and deal with strangeness or ()=>{} and deal with relatively poor readability (at least for a beginner)
06:56:27  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
06:57:14  * Draggor1joined
06:57:34  <dilijev>(hypothetically and I don't actually support this) What if we introduced a `def` keyword that declared a function that would behave the way a `()=>{}` function would, but has a bit more syntactic clarity (and would be similar to function constructs in other languages (python and ruby both use `def`)
07:07:58  * gskachkovjoined
07:28:38  * howdoijoined
07:40:49  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
07:41:31  * gskachkovjoined
07:46:39  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
07:49:23  * Draggor1joined
07:56:38  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
07:57:20  * Draggor1joined
08:05:51  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
08:06:45  * Draggor1joined
08:23:57  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
08:34:40  * Draggor1joined
08:50:10  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
08:52:52  * gskachkovjoined
09:05:50  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
09:08:32  * Draggor1joined
10:05:21  * Draggor1quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
10:06:03  * Draggor1joined
10:14:16  * Draggor1quit (Read error: No route to host)
10:15:02  * Draggor1joined
10:17:53  * gskachkovquit (Quit: gskachkov)
10:25:09  * mylesborinsquit (Remote host closed the connection)
10:25:50  * mylesborinsjoined
10:29:10  * AtumTjoined
11:43:04  * not-an-aardvarkquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
11:46:29  * jmdyckjoined
12:24:33  * caridyquit (Remote host closed the connection)
12:25:00  * caridyjoined
13:12:49  * howdoiquit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity)
14:26:10  * cloudshujoined
14:50:45  * Fishrock123joined
16:34:07  * caridyquit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
17:02:51  * caridyjoined
17:14:31  * gskachkovjoined
19:40:33  * gibson042joined
19:48:35  * bradleymeckjoined
19:58:30  <ljharb>dilijev: it only involves arrow functions if you need `this`, which it's totally possible to write an entire codebase without using.
20:52:39  * Fishrock123quit (Remote host closed the connection)
21:06:34  * Fishrock123joined
21:30:02  <bterlson>Domenic: thoughts on `oldid` attribute vs. just putting `<a id=...></a>` in the source document?
21:30:20  <Domenic><a id?
21:30:30  <Domenic>Well, <span id, probably
21:30:48  <Domenic>I like oldids, as it allows you to not know *where* to put the <span id>
21:31:27  <Domenic>I believe the correct answer ends up being "inside the <h1>" or something, for scroll-to-ability reasons
21:31:27  <bterlson>I guess
21:33:30  <jmdyck>(If there's multiple ids in the oldids, you can't put them all in the h1, so maybe better to create <a id=> for each)
21:33:54  <bterlson>I think the emit strategy for old-id is to always use a span with an id
21:34:05  <bterlson>rather than trying to cram it on to some existing element
21:34:57  <bterlson>oldid has to be supported for every element, the rules for placing the oldid may be complex
21:39:11  * Fishrock123quit (Quit: Leaving...)
21:40:40  <Domenic>You put the <a id>s inside the <h1>, whether there's one or multiple
21:40:45  <Domenic>s/a/span
21:41:02  <bterlson>is there a strong reason to prefer span over a btw?
21:41:09  <bterlson>a is fewer bytes ;)
21:41:41  <bterlson>that's for oldids. For figures and tables, probably above the element. For DFNs, inline before.
21:41:50  <jmdyck>a sorry, when you said "inside the <h1>", I thought you meant inside the tag, not inside the element.
21:43:49  <jmdyck>(currently, some of the old ids are recorded as an attribute on the h1)
21:45:27  <Domenic>I mean it's a meaningless element so <span> is the right semantics
21:45:59  <bterlson>semantics shemantics, this is html 5 sir
21:46:21  <bterlson>I use malformed elements all the time. It's like omitting semicolons.
21:55:56  <dilijev>^ bterlson: thems fightin' words
21:56:45  <dilijev>ljharb: Personally I agree that avoiding `this` is absolutely possible and sometimes the right thing to do. Every time I see something that involves confusion over what `this` should be, I end up asking: "But why would you be trying to use `this` here?"
22:12:25  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
22:21:11  * bradleymeckjoined
22:41:45  * bradleymeckquit (Quit: bradleymeck)
23:32:18  * bradleymeckjoined
23:34:51  * bradleymeckquit (Client Quit)
23:54:00  <TabAtkins>jmdyck: You totally can put them all in the h1, why do you think you can't?