Oh, my mistake! Will do in the future. :) Thank you for pointing this out!
146 karma · joined October 23, 2019
First, my point relates to JavaScript.
``` Take this code: const list = [2,1,2,"4", 5]; console.log( list.sort((a,b) => a-b) ); // [1, 2, 2, "4", 5] ``` This is kind of correct (or wrong), depending on how to view things. But I think we must acknowledge this as a part of the language design of JavaScript.
However, using strict eq... ``` console.log( list.findIndex((value) => value === 4) ); // -1 ``` Correct, sure.
On the other hand... ``` console.log( list.findIndex((value) => value == 4) ); // 3 ``` But now we're using a non strict form of equality.
In JavaScript, the aspects of the language described above can cause a problem concerning binary search. Because of JSs lack of strictness, we can't trust our data in the same way as in C or Rust or other languages (even though TypeScript could save us).
Sure if the preconditions aren't met, then we can't use BS. My point is that even though another language still would have to sort the elements in an array, we would know that all elements were of the same type in an array.
As programmers we want the behavior of our code to be predictable. And my point - I don't know if it is valid though - is that in JavaScript we can't. Therefore we would have to check every value in the array beforehand, and in JS we would have to do this linearly. I don't know if I misuse the terminology now, in that case, please tell me so (and I will be at least a bit wiser). My main point is that the big O of binary search is irrelevant in the context of JavaScript, if we're not 100% sure that our array is sorted and of the same type. Many other languages would have the first problem (we must trust the array to sorted), while JavaScript has to problems and this is more unpredictable. And I think we can only ensure this by the use of a linear method in JS.
But CS as a career boost is very instrumental. I think it's better to focus on the good parts:
a) CS is fascinating, b) I also think there is an ethical side of CS. For each year, more 'logic' ends up in the frontend - I think. If this is true, there is an ethical dimension to it; not everyone have a new computer with the latest browser - performance has a ethical dimension.
Also, I for one hates when web sites are slow (so I guess there also is a business/economical side as well). But my main point is that - and no, I am not saying you're guilty of this, you clearly like CS (why comment otherwise), but the reasons you provide would gain from adding the perspective I am trying to provide, I think - is that CS should be studied because it is important, and fascinating. :)
I will never be good with CS. But if my own take on CS were only instrumental (career boost), I would most likely end up with less knowledge in comparison with reasons related to fascination (and ethics). I think this is an important point. Sure, it is perhaps made often. But in that case, I think it is important to repeat it. I see ads for many CS courses on i.e. Udemy with titles like CS for interviews and so on. I am not saying those course are bad (don't know); all I am saying is this is an instrumental view and that we (developers as a community) sometimes should be better at finding the right reasons.
Sorry, this was a long reply. :( :)
I should provide some background. I don’t have any education in CS. This is an antempt on my behalf to fill gaps of knowledge. Being a junior frontend dev they are plenty, and I am thankful for your criticism (thanks again! You’ll make me better).
Anyway, I have changed the blog post! Mostly by erasing text. But if there are no good, clear red thread this is the best way. :) Thanks again!