Nishio ahh. Im currently.

Defusco: RonRichie: oh maybe use debugger; ! Someone showed it on here the other day and it’s pretty ace

Defusco: The ! isn’t needed, I was being enthusiastic

Domenico: Baxx well, I didn’t necessarily said I phrased it correctly and you both got it wrong, what I said is you both got it wrong perhaps because the way I worded it lol

Nishio: RonRichie: line 14, == 20? what?

Holdridge: But yeah you got the point

Nishio: If you multiply 12 * 6 * 2, it’s not 20

Defusco: RonRichie: so the phrase that you’re looking for there is ‘sos I didn’t explain myself there’ not ‘you got it wrong’

Nishio: 4*3*2*1 = 24, which is the correct answer

Pivec: Thats what I was doing and that’s how I think function thinks of it

Nishio: No, your function thinks of it correctly

Mensick: This is what function seems to do in 4*3 + 3*2 + 2*1 = 20 soo then turns out this not how it does, right?

Nishio: That is not what your function is doing

Lan: You were right, it’s doing 4 * 3 * 2 * 1

Hargers: Aha, get it: soooo the question is, how can I see the way my function thinks and how it does so? I know ultimately its doing 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 but by looking at the way this function is constructed im having a hard time imagining that’s what it does. thats where is my problem :-/

Nishio: You read the function. that’s how you do it

Nishio: Write it down. trace what it’s doing. like you tried to do

Craker: If you want to see it upside it’s actually doing

Defusco: RonRichie: debugger; has been useful for me.

Demastus: Or perhaps maybe it does like this?

Demeris: Then it’s multiplyign that by 3

Laurente: Baxx aha, I got this numbers thru debugger, i consoled a value before being changed so that’s how I actually even figured whats happening at all

Nishio: RonRichie: no. it’s 4 * factorial3 where factorial3 == 3 * factorial2 where factorial2 == 2 * factorial1 where factorial1 == 1

Kalinoski: Function combination n { if n === 1 return 0; return n*n – 1 + combinationn – 1 }4

Schwertfager: Nishio could you type down in my fiddle the way you say it actually executes ?

Nishio: RonRichie: i just typed it in text, right there

Dugay: Now I imagine implementing stringifyJSON and paseJSON recursively lol that must be tough.

Kalinoski: I wrote a serialization lib that works recursively

Kalinoski: Http://

Kalinoski: It’s the best way to do the task really

Offen: I would imagine that any sort of serializer uses recursion

Mckenley: It’s worse when you deal with recursion and async at the same time

Ceasar: That one can make your head spin for a while

Fortado: How hard it should be implementing those functions i mentioned above tough? it probably nothing easy right?

Rams: I think there’s a polyfill on the mdn

Sousa: Are there any sites where i can practice html and css development besides codecademy?

Pesicka: Pikul :-/ Im asked by my school to re-implement getElementByCl***Name, stringifyJSON and p****JSON all recursively and I can already tell this gonna be pain in the butt, Im not even familiar with DOM that well so it’s gonna be tough for me I guess :-/

Nishio: RonRichie: it’s not that hard to write a simple lexer/p****r like the one for json, but it does ***ume you have some basic idea on how to lex and p**** things

Kalinoski: RonRichie: you can just use xpath for the first one lol

Elston: Kalinoski lol what’s that though?

Kalinoski: Although that might be cheating

Kalinoski: Xpath is a syntax for XML selectors that works in the browser

Vankomen: Nishio ahh. Im currently going thru code academy’s recursion course and afterwards will do jQuery, not sure how these two can help to get this done but im gonna attempt it at last :