The rake has nothing to do with JS (which I agree is cursed, but for its own reasons, not this).

You have called a function in a way that does not give a consistent value (Date()). Such functions are hardly the preserve of JavaScript. You've failed to adequately deal with the range of values produced, with code that tries to insist that the "31st February" can be a meaningful date in February. You should accept that this is your mistake and learn to (better) avoid side effects where possible.

Also, the function isn't side effecty since it doesn't make implicit references outside its scope.

Edit responding to your edit:

Also, the function isn't side effecty since it doesn't make implicit references outside its scope.

The Date() function's output varies according to something other than its input (and even the rest of your program). Using its output without accounting for that variation means that your function, as originally written, also gives inconsistent return values, varying according to something other than its input, because it does, in fact, reference something outside the function. If it did not, the results would only depend on the monthNumber argument, and would always be consistent. I don't know what you call that, but I view it as a side effect.

As you have said, the rake is that months have different lengths, and you need to account for that. But that's not one of JavaScript's many issues.

You want to create the date "31st February", but it's JavaScript that's cursed?

Write a less side-effecty function.

function getMonthName(monthNumber) {
    const date = new Date(2023, monthNumber - 1, 1);
    return date.toLocaleString([], { month: 'long' });
}

Attempting to master baiting in public should certainly have consequences, but covering it up isn't going to make them stop.

Of course. I'm probably not the only one who thinks you like adding people to lists. Blaming your woes on the Others and treating them differently based on a mark they carry were just two of the clues.

Block me too.

Uh, the XiBucks, obviously.

Look, I get it. Hexbear is a demanding place to be. It expects you to not be a complete asshole almost all the time. You're regularly tested on knowledge of an emoji system so complex, it's been known to make London cab drivers cry. If you unthinkingly parrot talking points, you'll be pounced on with annoying facts and aggressive reasonable concern for the value of other people. And if you emit the slightest Hitler particle, you'll be outright banned. How authoritarian! Honesty, sometimes I wonder why I signed up, never mind stay around.

But then I remember that the folks there are a deeply caring lot, who see the problems in the world and actually want to do something about it—even though the goal often seems barely possible—and, in spite of everything, retain a sense of humour and try to make improvements for each other, even if, for now at least, it can only be a :meow-hug:.

Oh, and the XiBucks, of course. Some of us even get roubles, too!

We don't allow slave labor like communism does.

You might want to recheck that constitution.

Oh, no, what am I saying? You don't want to do that, because that would once more point out that you're clueless in your assertions. Now I don't want to read any more of them. And I'm free to turn you down, right?

Bad faith it is, then. Got it.

I know you deleted your earlier nonsense, but I saw some of it first, so I know how out of touch you are. You were wrong about how much wealth people have, but even after having that corrected, here you are with "It's just how the world works", another incorrect assertion that might describe your experience of the world, but is unrepresentative for humanity as a whole.

Most people don't have the luxuries you so clearly take for granted. Turning down exploitative employment is only an option for those with money in reserve. Most people do not have that. Going somewhere else means separation from family and friends—easy enough for the thoroughly unlikable, but community is important to most members of a social species. And, anyway, that's assuming there aren't legal restrictions like immigration controls. As I said before, most lives are more constrained than yours, and that isn't because those people are any less deserving. That is how the world works.

I'm going to suggest you read the article "Why Fascism is the Wave of the Future" by Edward Luttwak. Don't worry, it's just a warning, and it starts:—

That capitalism unobstructed by public regulations, cartels, monopolies, oligopolies, effective trade unions, cultural inhibitions or kinship obligations is the ultimate engine of economic growth is an old-hat truth

so it's not commie propaganda. But it might relieve you of some of your misconceptions, since you clearly aren't listening to us here. Of course, you could just carry on regardless, but then it'll be just far too clear that you're not acting in good faith.

This is the reasoning that leads to "if you think medicines are too expensive, stop buying them" with much the same problem of it not being quite that simple for the majority of humanity, whose "choices" are not as unconstrained as the ones you're familiar with.

The problem with notable examples is that they're pretty much never representative examples.

If wealth were actually distributed in the US equally that might be true, but as it is it's more than double what most Americans have, even ignoring inflation.

The average net worth of all American families was $746,820, according to the Federal Reserve’s 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances, while the median figure was $121,760.

— The Average Net Worth Of Americans—By Age, Education And Ethnicity