Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: Writing type conversions
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:48:22 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <87ft4zasc9.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <type-style-20201123132025@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <g50orfttg03lruckcm11jkj0anf2h01ern@4ax.com> <87eekjrfz0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i23vpaFkcrpU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="af43d4f48e27ea0e6f4a2239942bca67"; logging-data="14947"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19U3h3LvNluMrIrbeDHWxL5QQ5fx2OWj+s="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jPijRcgmb5scn7b3/oYF5c3eHNA= sha1:6ER1j7ab8UMPhLvgZKfv1Bg3H6c=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.90838ff958202ad83717.20201124114822GMT.87ft4zasc9.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:39185

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> writes:

> Ben Bacarisse:
>
>> John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> writes:
>> 
>>> On 23 Nov 2020 12:29:27 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   <snip>
>>>>  However, in the Java world many deemed »+ ""« to be bad
>>>>  style because it does not express the intent of the
>>>>  programmer to convert something to a string but would
>>>>  mystify the reader. I do not share this point of view,
>>>>  however, because I think the intent of »+ ""« is clear.
>>>
>>>   "" + x + 1
>>> makes it more obvious.
>> 
>> Am I missing a joke?  (It does something else altogether.)
>
> No - this is not a joke. Since JavaScript is loosely typed, the
> expression "" + x + 1 is totally valid

I know.  I was asking if I was missing a joke in the suggestion that ""
+ x + 1 is a more obvious way to write +x + 1 + "".  They do different
things.

-- 
Ben.