Merge pull request #27 from 109149/master

minor fixes

Author: LashaJini

1-js/01-getting-started/4-devtools/article.md

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ To see errors and get a lot of other useful information about scripts, "develope
 
 Most developers lean towards Chrome or Firefox for development because those browsers have the best developer tools. Other browsers also provide developer tools, sometimes with special features, but are usually playing "catch-up" to Chrome or Firefox. So most developers have a "favorite" browser and switch to others if a problem is browser-specific.
 
-Developer tools are potent, they have many features. To start, we'll learn how to open them, look at errors, and run JavaScript commands.
+Developer tools are potent; they have many features. To start, we'll learn how to open them, look at errors, and run JavaScript commands.
 
 ## Google Chrome
 

1-js/02-first-steps/02-structure/article.md

@@ -56,40 +56,36 @@ Errors which occur in such cases are quite hard to find and fix.
 If you're curious to see a concrete example of such an error, check this code out:
 
 ```js run
-[1, 2].forEach(alert)
+alert("Hello");
+
+[1, 2].forEach(alert);
 ```
 
-No need to think about the meaning of the brackets `[]` and `forEach` yet. We'll study them later. For now, just remember the result of the code: it shows `1` then `2`.
+No need to think about the meaning of the brackets `[]` and `forEach` yet. We'll study them later. For now, just remember the result of running the code: it shows `Hello`, then `1`, then `2`.
 
-Now, let's add an `alert` before the code and *not* finish it with a semicolon:
+Now let's remove the semicolon after the `alert`:
 
 ```js run no-beautify
-alert("There will be an error")
+alert("Hello")
 
-[1, 2].forEach(alert)
+[1, 2].forEach(alert);
 ```
 
-Now if we run the code, only the first `alert` is shown and then we have an error!
-
-But everything is fine again if we add a semicolon after `alert`:
-```js run
-alert("All fine now");
+The difference compared to the code above is only one character: the semicolon at the end of the first line is gone.
 
-[1, 2].forEach(alert)  
-```
+If we run this code, only the first `Hello` shows (and there's an error, you may need to open the console to see it). There are no numbers any more.
 
-Now we have the "All fine now" message followed by `1` and `2`.
+That's because JavaScript does not assume a semicolon before square brackets `[...]`. So, the code in the last example is treated as a single statement.
 
-
-The error in the no-semicolon variant occurs because JavaScript does not assume a semicolon before square brackets `[...]`.
-
-So, because the semicolon is not auto-inserted, the code in the first example is treated as a single statement. Here's how the engine sees it:
+Here's how the engine sees it:
 
 ```js run no-beautify
-alert("There will be an error")[1, 2].forEach(alert)
+alert("Hello")[1, 2].forEach(alert);
 ```
 
-But it should be two separate statements, not one. Such a merging in this case is just wrong, hence the error. This can happen in other situations.
+Looks weird, right? Such merging in this case is just wrong. We need to put a semicolon after `alert` for the code to work correctly.
+
+This can happen in other situations also.
 ````
 
 We recommend putting semicolons between statements even if they are separated by newlines. This rule is widely adopted by the community. Let's note once again -- *it is possible* to leave out semicolons most of the time. But it's safer -- especially for a beginner -- to use them.

1-js/02-first-steps/08-operators/article.md

@@ -115,6 +115,11 @@ alert('1' + 2 + 2); // "122" and not "14"
 ```
 Here, the first operand is a string, the compiler treats the other two operands as strings too. The `2` gets concatenated to `'1'`, so it's like `'1' + 2 = "12"` and `"12" + 2 = "122"`.
 
+```js run
+alert('1' + 2 + 2); // "122" and not "14"
+```
+Here, the first operand is a string, the compiler treats the other two operands as strings too. The `2` gets concatenated to `'1'`, so it's like `'1' + 2 = "12"` and `"12" + 2 = "122"`.
+
 The binary `+` is the only operator that supports strings in such a way. Other arithmetic operators work only with numbers and always convert their operands to numbers.
 
 Here's the demo for subtraction and division:

1-js/02-first-steps/11-logical-operators/article.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Logical operators
+# Logical operators: ||, && and !
 
 There are four logical operators in JavaScript: `||` (OR), `&&` (AND), `!` (NOT), `??` (Nullish Coalescing). Here we cover the first three, the `??` operator is in the next article.
 

1-js/02-first-steps/15-function-basics/article.md

@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ Functions that are used *very often* sometimes have ultrashort names.
 
 For example, the [jQuery](http://jquery.com) framework defines a function with `$`. The [Lodash](http://lodash.com/) library has its core function named `_`.
 
-These are exceptions. Generally functions names should be concise and descriptive.
+These are exceptions. Generally function names should be concise and descriptive.
 ```
 
 ## Functions == Comments

1-js/03-code-quality/05-testing-mocha/article.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 Automated testing will be used in further tasks, and it's also widely used in real projects.
 
-## Why we need tests?
+## Why do we need tests?
 
 When we write a function, we can usually imagine what it should do: which parameters give which results.
 

1-js/03-code-quality/06-polyfills/article.md

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Modern project build systems, such as [webpack](http://webpack.github.io/), prov
 
 New language features may include not only syntax constructs and operators, but also built-in functions.
 
-For example, `Math.trunc(n)` is a function that "cuts off" the decimal part of a number, e.g `Math.trunc(1.23) = 1`.
+For example, `Math.trunc(n)` is a function that "cuts off" the decimal part of a number, e.g `Math.trunc(1.23)` returns `1`.
 
 In some (very outdated) JavaScript engines, there's no `Math.trunc`, so such code will fail.
 

1-js/04-object-basics/04-object-methods/article.md

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ user = {
 // method shorthand looks better, right?
 user = {
 *!*
-  sayHi() { // same as "sayHi: function()"
+  sayHi() { // same as "sayHi: function(){...}"
 */!*
     alert("Hello");
   }

1-js/05-data-types/01-primitives-methods/article.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ Objects are "heavier" than primitives. They require additional resources to supp
 
 Here's the paradox faced by the creator of JavaScript:
 
-- There are many things one would want to do with a primitive like a string or a number. It would be great to access them as methods.
+- There are many things one would want to do with a primitive like a string or a number. It would be great to access them using methods.
 - Primitives must be as fast and lightweight as possible.
 
 The solution looks a little bit awkward, but here it is:

1-js/05-data-types/04-array/article.md

@@ -379,9 +379,7 @@ alert( arr[0] ); // undefined! no elements.
 alert( arr.length ); // length 2
 ```
 
-In the code above, `new Array(number)` has all elements `undefined`.
-
-To evade such surprises, we usually use square brackets, unless we really know what we're doing.
+To avoid such surprises, we usually use square brackets, unless we really know what we're doing.
 
 ## Multidimensional arrays