Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #22288

Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ?

Path csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!dedibox.gegeweb.org!gegeweb.eu!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Content-Type text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-ID <2069686.qHTUFZlykZ@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Reply-To Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <cljs@PointedEars.de>
Organization PointedEars Software (PES)
Date Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:27:26 +0100
User-Agent KNode/4.11.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding 8Bit
X-Face %i>XG-yXR'\"2P/C_aO%~;2o~?g0pPKmbOw^=NT`tprDEf++D.m7"}HW6.#=U:?2GGctkL,f89@H46O$ASoW&?s}.k+&.<b';Md8`dH6iqhT)6C^.Px|[=M@7=Ik[_w<%n1Up"LPQNu2m8|L!/3iby{-]A+#YE}Kl{Cw$\U!kD%K}\2jz"QQP6Uqr],./"?;=4v
Face 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
Subject Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ?
Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
References <4a645078$0$292$7a628cd7@news.club-internet.fr> <8d349f92-a64b-4837-9f00-cbcc4d07f985@k19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <0a06e88a-f13d-4ced-a49a-361556b80643@googlegroups.com> <l87tmt$860$2@dont-email.me> <1536350.F63rdpPjnV@PointedEars.de> <l8a4a4$73j$1@speranza.aioe.org>
MIME-Version 1.0
Lines 64
NNTP-Posting-Date 11 Dec 2013 18:27:30 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host 683da261.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace DXC=@eJlkJg66C]U6b:FjPaGjQA9EHlD;3YcR4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[GclJ;UXXi3YDZm8W4\YJN\d0KWJRZReU_6ACEa4WY4?ZBW2nT`k4\JT
X-Complaints-To usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:22288

Show key headers only | View raw


Joao Rodrigues wrote:

> Em 10/12/2013 21:22, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn escreveu:
>> Denis McMahon wrote:
>>> function hide(tid,c,h=true){
>>                         ^^^^^
>> Syntax error.  Default parameters cannot (yet) be defined this way in
>> strictly conforming implementations of ECMAScript.  You have to
>> initialize them if they are not present, for example:
>>
>>    function hide(tid, c, h)
>>    {
>>      if (typeof h == "undefined")
>>      {
>>        h = true;
>>      }
> 
> Considering your "strictly conforming implementations of ECMAScript",
> it could be just:
> 
>    if (h === undefined) { h = true; }

Non sequitur.  The “undefined” property of the Global Object did not always 
have the ReadOnly attribute before.  You knew fairly well what I meant by 
“strictly conforming” in that regard, did you not?
 
> or
> 
>    h = h || true;

Not equivalent; also inefficient, and error-prone.

>>      /* or */
>>
>>      if (arguments.length < 3)
>>      {
>>        h = true;
>>      }
>>
>> The difference between the first and second approach is that with the
>> second one there is no false positive if “undefined” is passed for “h”.
> 
> It's not the case,

Yes, it is.  Passing any value, even the “undefined” value, will increase 
the value of arguments.length, but passing the “undefined” value cannot be 
told from not passing *any* (here: third) argument if you use typeof or 
compare against “undefined” (provided that it has not been overwritten) 
because formal parameters for which no argument has been passed are 
initialized with (the built-in) “undefined” implicitly.

> but there is a problem with this sort of testing when
> an optional argument is passed a value from another source such as a
> configuration object, when it might produce undefined. That's why it is
> better to test for undefined.

Neither test is viable when a parameter object is passed, and nobody but you 
suggested that it is intended to.  You are jumping to conclusions again.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? kumarcherukuris@gmail.com - 2013-12-10 09:02 -0800
  Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-12-10 19:20 +0000
  Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-12-10 20:31 +0000
    Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2013-12-10 22:35 +0000
      Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-12-11 00:16 +0000
      Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> - 2013-12-11 11:16 +0100
        Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Nisse Engström <news.NOSPAM.uvex6@luden.se> - 2014-02-15 02:38 +0100
      Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2013-12-11 11:23 -0200
        Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-12-11 19:16 +0000
    Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-12-11 00:22 +0100
      Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2013-12-11 14:36 -0200
        Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-12-11 18:27 +0100
        Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-12-11 19:23 +0000
          Re: best method to "hide" a whole <table> column ? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2013-12-11 22:08 -0200

csiph-web