The Duality of a JavaScript Developer
Description
A four-panel 'Wojak vs. Chad' comic that contrasts opinions on JavaScript. In the top-left panel, a crying Wojak character labeled 'Non JavaScript dev' yells, 'JavaScript is shit and full of inconsistencies!!!'. To his right, a stoic, bearded 'Chad' character labeled 'JavaScript dev' calmly replies, 'Go learn it'. The bottom two panels feature two identical Chad 'JavaScript dev' characters talking to each other. The one on the left states, 'JavaScript is shit and full of inconsistencies', and the one on the right simply replies, 'Yes'. This meme captures the nuanced perspective of experienced JavaScript developers: they defend the language against outsiders but privately acknowledge and accept its well-known quirks and flaws among themselves
Comments
7Comment deleted
Arguing with a senior JS dev about the language's flaws is pointless. We've already accepted that '[]' is truthy but not '== true', and we've shipped three frameworks that depend on it
JavaScript: the only language we brag about for its “flexibility” while secretly chaining TypeScript, ESLint, Prettier, and 400 KB of polyfills just to cosplay as something deterministic
We've spent 15 years building abstractions on top of JavaScript's quirks, and now the abstractions have quirks that need abstractions - it's turtles all the way down, but at least they're async turtles
This perfectly captures the JavaScript developer's arc: you start by screaming about `[] + {} !== {} + []`, spend three years debugging `this` binding in nested callbacks, finally understand why `0.1 + 0.2 !== 0.3`, and emerge as a battle-hardened veteran who can calmly explain to newcomers that yes, JavaScript's type coercion is objectively insane, and yes, you'll still ship production code in it tomorrow because you've learned that all languages are terrible in their own special ways - JavaScript just has the decency to be honest about it upfront
JavaScript is inconsistent? Yes. That’s why our stack is harm reduction: TypeScript, ESLint, Prettier, and a CI job that treats '==' like a CVE
20 YoE JS architect: 'Inconsistencies? Nah, just CAP theorem for types - welcome eventual coherence.'
If you can’t explain why [] + {} !== {} + [] and why typeof null is "object", you don’t get to complain about JavaScript - come back after '==' burns you in prod