Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!.POSTED.69.235.197.178.dynamic.wless.lssmb00p-cgnat.res.cust.swisscom.ch!not-for-mail From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: why the ! operator can be used to determine a string is null? Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 04:33:17 +0200 Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Lines: 32 Message-ID: <1678649.tdWV9SEqCh@PointedEars.de> References: <87zib8g4eb.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <10915888.O9o76ZdvQC@PointedEars.de> <877eycdzm9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2062468.ElGaqSPkdT@PointedEars.de> <871sokduyx.fsf@bsb.me.uk> Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit Injection-Info: gwaiyur.mb-net.net; posting-host="69.235.197.178.dynamic.wless.lssmb00p-cgnat.res.cust.swisscom.ch:178.197.235.69"; logging-data="11604"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@open-news-network.org" User-Agent: KNode/4.14.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:L7PPOj+j8TSYTzX047eZWBUhtRI= X-Face: %i>XG-yXR'\"2P/C_aO%~;2o~?g0pPKmbOw^=NT`tprDEf++D.m7"}HW6.#=U:?2GGctkL,f89@H46O$ASoW&?s}.k+&. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn writes: >> Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn writes: >>>> Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> >>>>> Further complicated by the fact that there is a character called null >>>>> (sometimes Null, Nul or NULL) so a string can "be null" in that it >>>>> contains just that character. >>>> As we are talking about ECMAScript, it is the Unicode character U+0000 >>>> NULL (to my surprise, not “NUL” as in US-ASCII) whose standard >>>> representation is a boxed “NUL” (AFAIK, it is *never* called “null”, >>>> “Null” or “Nul”): >>> If you can find an original copy of the standard you'll see a table of >>> control characters that gives "Abbreviations" (though most are acronyms) >>> and, as you say, NUL is the abbreviation for the first one. After that >>> table is an explanation that gives the name as "Null" and the >>> abbreviation as "Nul" (for some reason not in caps). >> *I have just cited* “an original copy of the standard”, so please cite >> evidence supporting your claims. > > X3.4-1967 "The American Standard for Information Interchange". We are not talking about *that* standard as that has nothing to do with ECMAScript; we are talking about the *Unicode* character, therefore the corresponding *Unicode* Standard. -- PointedEars FAQ: | | Twitter: @PointedEars2 | Please do not cc me./Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.