"Here is your new apartment. You must use a key to enter it. If you forget your key, you can buzz the superintendent during business hours, and if the super is home, (s)he will open the door for you.”
If you try to take your key with you at all times, the super will save your bacon once in a blue moon when you forget your key. On the other hand, if you think of the door as only needing a key when you wish to have it opened on nights and week-ends, you are on your way to trouble.
This is not a good analogy. More like the superintendant will let you into a different apartment, or let you into your apartment and then punch you in the face. You just don't know.
But you don't need analogies to understand why ASI is a bad idea. ASI means that when you leave out a semi-colon you get unexpected behavior instead of a syntax error. Failure is always better than the unknown. At least then there's a chance the bug will be found and fixed.
Trusting artificial intelligence to make up for human stupidity doesn't look like a very good idea to me.
ASI is supposed to work in exceptional scenarios where you would have ended up making a mistake but wouldn't want to be reminded of. And that is supposed to be in rare scenarios.
Now if you make exception the norm and expect tools to make up for bad practices then its not going to help.
And this is why I think Python's forced indentation is in some way bad. Because it makes the code from a bad and good programmer both look same. And merely forcing code indentation won't magically transmogrify a bad programmer to a good programmer. There are many things to good programming and indentation is just one of them. Worse it will make both's code look the same.
Forgiving or masking or making bad practices look good doesn't help on the longer run. It only encourages such behavior. I am sure bad programmers can slip in easily into these communities than else where, because they are difficult to flush out and their mistakes are often forgiven or made look good.
The difference is that if you forget your key, you know that you forgot your key, and you have to actively call the superintendent to have them "save your bacon." With ASI, you might never know that you had forgotten your key.
I agree that it would be nice to have something like "-Wall" that could warn you that you're doing things the "wrong way" but, uh, isn't that what JSLint is?
That's a terrible analogy. What's the analog for receiving a syntax error instead when you "forget your keys"? The analogy gives you bizarre and wrong choices and tradeoffs.
As usual, analogies do more harm than good, especially when understanding a relatively simple technical issue.
You forget your keys, the super doesn’t let you in, you’re locked out. That’s the equivalent of a syntax error.
On another topic, this isn’t really a technical issue, it’s a people issue. Everyone understands what the JS interpreter’s behaviour is, what Bootstrap.js does, and why JSMin doesn’t minify it. What is being discussed here is what choices people make to please themselves and others as opposed to the compiler.
If @fat didn’t care about people, he’d use semicolons and JSMin would compile Bootstrap. If Crockford didn’t care about people, JSMin would compile Bootstrap just the way it is. When we’re talking about multiple ways of writing code that does the same thing, it’s almost entirely about people and not technical considerations.
If you try to take your key with you at all times, the super will save your bacon once in a blue moon when you forget your key. On the other hand, if you think of the door as only needing a key when you wish to have it opened on nights and week-ends, you are on your way to trouble.