Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #39898
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| Subject | Re: I don't get it |
| Date | 2021-04-11 11:41 +0100 |
| Organization | A little, after lunch |
| Message-ID | <s4ujou$r1a$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <20917gl3dv8shs6qqf1dqginq69e50aa54@4ax.com> <s4r30i$i9b$1@dont-email.me> <8735vytcwa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <s4sn1v$5vl$1@dont-email.me> <87lf9qrozz.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
On 10/04/2021 19:08, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 10/04/2021 15:47, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 09/04/2021 20:01, John G Harris wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 10:03:13 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>> After spending two days some years ago I discovered that IE and Firefox
>>>>>> differed in their handling of comparisons of numerical and string data,
>>>>>> and that something like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if('1'== 1)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> was handled differently in each browser.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As with all loosely typed languages, bugs in your code are trumped by
>>>>>> bugs in the language itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Was that before or after they claimed to conform to ECMA 262? If
>>>>> after, one or both browsers had a bug, not the language. If before,
>>>>> that's what you get with USPs.
>>>>
>>>> It was around 2007 give or take. IE6 and XP was current. I coded for
>>>> firefox, it broke in IE6.
>>>>
>>>> I actually checked the language spec. As far as I cam remember the
>>>> spec was explicit, that you converted to whatever the target of an
>>>> assignement was in a mixed type operation, but in a conditional there
>>>> was no assignment type...
>>>
>>> So you looked in the wrong place. I don't think that adds much useful
>>> information. ECMA 262, 3rd edition (2000) is very clear about the
>>> conversions required by the == operator (section 11.9.1 and 11.9.3).
>>> For the record, the string should be converted to a number (and the
>>> algorithm for doing that is given in great detail too).
>>>
>>> So it's not an issue with the specification. Testing in IE6 running on
>>> XP I find that the conversion is done correctly. Did Mozilla really
>>> have such a crude bug, and if so, did you really code for that despite
>>> the specification being clear?
>>>
>> All I know is that IE6 and firefox gave different results and it was
>> down to an implicit cast in a conditional statement. The code I have
>> now - dated 2008, after fixing - simply turns everything explicitly
>> into a Number()....so I assume that firefox was doing that implicitly
>> and IE6 was not.
>
> I've tested it on IE6. Unless IE6 is a Heisenberg browser, it does the
> conversion correctly.
>
>> You can defend the language all you like - I was past caring.
>
> I'm not defending the language.
>
>> I had a job to do and IE6 and firefox produced completely different
>> results on the same web page, because of casting. Forcing everything
>> to a number whether it needed it or not fixed the issue.
>
> Maybe is was Mozilla that got it wrong, or maybe you are
> mis-remembering?
>
There was no right or wrong as I recall. Two browsers interpreted the
spec differently because the correct interpretation was not clear.
I coded for Mozilla. It worked, Others tried IE6, it didn't work. I
scattered explicit Number() casts throughout my code, it worked for
everyone.
At some level mozilla was casting to a number, but IE6 wasn't.
I spent a little time trying to work out what SHOULD happen, but the
spec didn't cover the exact case.
--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
..I'd spend it on drink.
Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 03:32 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 03:37 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 04:26 -0700
Re: I don't get it JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 19:39 +0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 05:53 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-08 13:55 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-09 00:46 -0700
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-09 10:03 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-09 04:09 -0700
Re: I don't get it "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2021-04-09 11:07 -0700
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-10 03:23 +0100
Re: I don't get it "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2021-04-10 22:02 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-11 01:05 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-11 01:07 -0700
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-11 11:42 +0100
Re: I don't get it John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2021-04-09 20:01 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-09 13:31 -0700
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-10 03:37 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-09 23:53 -0700
Re: I don't get it John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2021-04-10 12:05 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-10 15:59 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-10 15:47 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-10 18:25 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2021-04-10 17:29 +0000
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-10 19:08 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-11 11:41 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-11 14:33 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-12 02:39 -0700
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-12 11:21 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-12 10:19 -0700
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-12 21:20 +0100
Re: I don't get it "sc...@sauyet.com" <scott@sauyet.com> - 2021-04-12 14:32 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-13 04:11 -0700
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-13 14:58 +0100
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-13 09:20 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-13 09:29 -0700
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-13 20:06 +0100
Re: I don't get it "sc...@sauyet.com" <scott@sauyet.com> - 2021-04-13 15:09 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-14 01:15 -0700
Re: I don't get it "sc...@sauyet.com" <scott@sauyet.com> - 2021-04-14 05:22 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-15 11:52 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-15 11:57 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-15 12:04 -0700
Re: I don't get it Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2021-04-15 19:29 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-20 14:12 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-20 14:47 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-20 23:35 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-21 01:08 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-21 01:24 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-21 01:29 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-13 09:32 -0700
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-13 21:59 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-14 01:32 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-14 09:08 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-14 10:06 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-14 10:59 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-14 14:05 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-14 16:32 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-14 23:53 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-15 13:56 +0100
Re: I don't get it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2021-04-12 11:20 +0100
Re: I don't get it Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-04-08 15:21 +0100
Re: I don't get it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2021-04-09 16:50 +0200
Re: I don't get it Man From a city with name Viljandi <he12457@hotmail.com> - 2021-04-08 10:44 -0700
Re: I don't get it Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2021-04-10 00:01 -0700
csiph-web