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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #31222

Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable

Show key headers only | View raw

On 30.08.2016 at 12:11, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> Christoph M. Becker wrote:
> 
>> Once you get the hang of using Array.prototype.forEach(), you'll
>> probably find many places where a more specific array method is more
>> appropriate (for instance, .filter() and map()), and these can simplify
>> the code (even more).
> 
> Yes, but:
> 
> Efficiency issues aside (while the callback is usually compiled only once, 
> there is a *function call* for *each* iteration), one has to be really 
> careful when refactoring loops to calls to iterating Array prototype methods 
> because then in the callback you are in a *function* where things work 
> differently.
> 
> For example, it will be difficult to impossible to convert a “for” or 
> “while” loop that uses the ”break”, “continue” or “return” statements to 
> *equivalent* callback code: “break” and “continue” are not allowed outside 
> of loops.  “return” in a callback is equivalent to a “continue” without 
> label, but there is no elegant equivalent for ”break” (keeping to call the 
> callback and querying a non-local flag so that the callback returns early is 
> _not_ elegant IMO), and “return” returns *from the callback*, _not_ from the 
> function that called the Array method, so there is no elegant equivalent for 
> that either.

Indeed, good caveats!  However, one can come a long way without using
`break`, `continue` or early `return`, and I often prefer that, except
when performance is of utmost importance.  One rather common use of
`break`, for instance, is for (linear) searching/checking;
Array.prototype.every() resp. Array.prototype.some() can be alternatives.

> One also has to deal with the fact that the “this” value in the callback is 
> either the “undefined” value (strict mode) or a reference to the global 
> object (otherwise) by default. […]

In my humble opinion, the dynamic binding of `this` has been a most
unfortunate design decision, even though it allows for some interesting
programming techniques (such as borrowing).

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

Thread

JSlint finds for loops intolerable emf <emfril@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 06:56 -0400
  Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2016-08-28 14:28 +0200
    Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable emf <emfril@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 22:35 -0400
    Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-30 12:11 +0200
      Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2016-09-03 20:54 +0200
      Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2016-09-03 23:03 +0000
    Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2016-09-03 22:47 +0000
  Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Lewis Perin <perin@panix.com> - 2016-08-28 16:50 -0400
    Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Lewis Perin <perin@panix.com> - 2016-08-28 18:49 -0400
      Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable Lewis Perin <perin@panix.com> - 2016-08-28 19:13 -0400
  Re: JSlint finds for loops intolerable $Bill <news@todbe.com> - 2016-08-28 14:59 -0700

csiph-web