Remove BigInt IE incompatibility part

[FloffyGarlic]

As Internet Explorer was retired years ago, this paragraph is not needed anymore, so I deleted that line.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[joaquinelio]

The link, in this context (" You can check..."), is useless, it's all checked and IE is missing. I would Remove it..

Should the ref to IE be removed?

Many references to IE compatibility exist in the tutorial. I once submitted a PR removing all of them, but I was told that IE is still used in corporate environments that have not yet migrated. Maybe is time, I don't know.

Also the tutorial includes explanations for old and no longer recommended functions and practices because students may encounter old code using them so maybe ie refs can stay. Nah, in this particular case I would remove it too.

[FloffyGarlic]

We could mention something along the lines of "Although virtually all browsers support BigInts today, they still count as a relatively new feature. You can check [insert MDN compatibility table] to check which version of each browser is compatible with BigInt". However, I still think it's redundant. Sure, knowing about the MDN reference is important, but since the type is compatible with virtually every browser, the MDN compatibility reference is not necessary anymore when it comes to BigInts themselves. Thus, it probably doesn't deserve a place in the BigInts paragraph. It's good to be concise.

[FloffyGarlic]

The link, in this context (" You can check..."), is useless, it's all checked and IE is missing. I would Remove it..

Should the ref to IE be removed?

Many references to IE compatibility exist in the tutorial. I once submitted a PR removing all of them, but I was told that IE is still used in corporate environments that have not yet migrated. Maybe is time, I don't know.

Also the tutorial includes explanations for old and no longer recommended functions and practices because students may encounter old code using them so maybe ie refs can stay. Nah, in this particular case I would remove it too.

@joaquinelio May I ask for a review if you approve of this change?

[joaquinelio]

@joaquinelio May I ask for a review if you approve of this change?

@FloffyGarlic It's not matter of approval, the eepo is having little activity

About IE, even retired, the tutorial still shows it because of the old code (corporate code in this case) you may still encounter. Here I just dont think it is useful

[smith558]

Thank you for your contribution! 🙂 @FloffyGarlic And the review! @joaquinelio @mohitgedar