Naming Memes

The documentation tells you to name variables based on what they contain. So naturally, if your variable contains an object, you should call it [object Object] . You know, because that's what JavaScript returns when you try to convert an object to a string. Perfect naming convention, right? The joke here is that "" + {} is JavaScript's delightful way of coercing an empty object into a string, which gives you the utterly useless "[object Object]" . It's the programming equivalent of asking someone their name and they respond with "I am a person." Every JavaScript developer has seen this cursed string in their console at least a hundred times, usually when they forgot to properly stringify something. It's become the universal symbol of "oops, I didn't handle this object correctly."

JavaScript developers evolving their Promise syntax like it's Pokémon. First there was .convertToPromise() which nobody remembers using. Then came .makePromise() , the awkward teenage phase. But .promisify() ? That's the good stuff that makes developers bare their teeth in that special "I finally found the right utility function after 3 hours of Stack Overflow" grin.

The eternal battle continues! First person states the obvious: "JavaScript is not Java. They are different languages." But the reply below absolutely murders with precision: "Java is to JavaScript as Car is to Carpet." That analogy is devastatingly accurate. Despite sharing part of their name, these languages have about as much in common as a vehicle and floor covering. The naming confusion has been trolling newbie developers since 1995 when Netscape thought "hey, Java's hot right now, let's name our scripting language to sound similar for marketing!" 6412 upvotes for stating the obvious vs 1301 for the perfect analogy? The real bug is in the voting algorithm.