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 21:56:27 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <87mtz6a06s.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <type-style-20201123132025@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <g50orfttg03lruckcm11jkj0anf2h01ern@4ax.com> <87eekjrfz0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <1gkqrft95t0ke57qb3qfo27mmtuqdbqh8b@4ax.com>
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="24897"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19y9VwEBNcvic7nGOI3PhbwuJArM0DtIyA="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:h/TfistXBHJWcJ7zo4ajdAvZkjA= sha1:uyh8JGac5hlGMD6nNIJ80Kgvadk=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.a9320d8fc39a36947ad8.20201124215627GMT.87mtz6a06s.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:39189

John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> writes:

> On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 20:11:15 +0000, Ben Bacarisse
> <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>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, though I wasn't sure what the original intention was supposed to
> be.
>
>   var x = 2;
>   "" + x + 4       // "24"
> and
>   var x = 2;
>   "" + (x + 4)     // "6"
>
> both make the intention clear. Other variants belong in an obscuration
> contest, and nowhere else.

But since this is not what the code was doing, that seems to be a
premature judgement.  How should the original be written so as to avoid
your opprobrium?

-- 
Ben.