87
u/madam_zeroni 6d ago
Wtf does this do
110
u/marinated_pork 6d ago
This is essentially a custom string fingerprint/hash function disguised as a parser. It takes a string and deterministically turns it into an integer. It does not parse or extract useful structured data.
53
u/the_horse_gamer 6d ago
"parse", clearly
48
u/TheSpiffySpaceman 6d ago
Well tbf, the code didn't start with the annotation
/* // Parses input */ function parse(s, i = 0, x = [0, 1]) {...8
122
u/Candid_Bullfrog3665 6d ago
ngl, this seems like someone just started learning how to use bitwise operators and thought "heh, im gonna act smart writing this code!"
39
u/Yarhj 6d ago
I have been this person.
20
u/-goldenboi69- 6d ago
Haven't we all?
8
u/DependentJicama4766 5d ago
Its a rite of passage. This and hating yourself a few weeks later because you cant understand shit of what you wrote lol
15
u/lonkamikaze 5d ago
I don't know if JS sports this, but the recursion qualifies for tail call optimisation, i.e. there is no stack pushing, popping. The return comes at the price of a goto and the result is just as efficient as a loop.
8
u/oweiler 5d ago
Not supported, at least not by the ECMAScript standard.
5
u/zjarek_s 5d ago
TCO was supported in ES6 standard, but it was only implemented in Safari and it ended up being dropped due to other browsers.
3
2
21
u/--var 6d ago
not recursive regex, just a recursive function that happens to use regex...
you know I used to be irked by one off variables, but after the better part of 20 years I'm 🤬
const r is only used once.... there's no reason you couldn't just place it where it is used an save two lines of code, and lose no readability, and have one less "magic variable"... unless you taught yourself from the same "teach yourself" book that your teacher taught themself from. (ironic that this still applies with AI; and if you don't get why that entertaining, please don't go into programming)
1
u/Square_Bad1781 2d ago
depends. if it is just a Poc for example and they maybe plan to use this variable more than once in the future, defining it as const directly wiuld be right imo. i also really like to do this kind of stuff in long functions (which this one isn't really) just to not have to go look for the things i want to change or tweak if i should have to do that in the future.
1
u/werdebud 2d ago
But why people don’t use names instead of cryptic one chars? Is this meant to be running in a 32mb of ram system so we are cutting edges in number of chars typed?
1
u/Square_Bad1781 2d ago
idk. i hate stuff like this myself. thats a whole other topic than const variables for one time use tho
4
u/OhMyGodItsEverywhere 6d ago
Pretty sure the regex is malformed. I didn't even think you could split a regex over multiple lines in JS like that.
Assuming this is the text version of it: /(\((?:[^()]|\([^()]*\))*\)|(?:\w|[^\w\s])){1,3})/; very easy mistake to spot /s...
11
u/digitalseraphim 6d ago
I don't see anything "malformed", but pretty sure
(?:\w|[^\w\s])is just.Edit: I see the mismatched parens now. On my phone, the
\before one of the opens was on the previous line and I missed it 3 times 😂5
u/iakobski 5d ago
I don't see anything "malformed", but pretty sure
(?:\w|[^\w\s])is just.Yes, almost. It's any single word character, or any single character that's neither a word character nor a space. So it's simply "not a space character", or [^\s].
3
1
u/sadongrohiik 2d ago
I want this power of seeing regex and having the faintest idea of what it does
2
2
2
2
2
u/BussyEnthusiasts 2d ago
Does your codebase have a character limit or something? Why are all the variables a single char?
1
1
1
1
u/FedUp233 5d ago
Regex is powerful, but for anything except the simplest matching unless you work with it every day, totally unusable for anything complicated in my opinion. Right up there with the language APL for programming (and lisp isn’t far behind).
I wish there was a language that allowed you to express text parsing/processing in a more readable language (like a pascal for text or something). It can translate into anything it wants internally but there is no reason the human readable input should be any more obscure than C.
1
0
u/Ariquitaun Pronouns:This/Self 5d ago
This is almost certainly ai generated. Or a mathematical savant.
285
u/LapidistCubed 6d ago
My first thought is a mathematician wrote this