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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #39195

Re: Writing type conversions

Show all headers | View raw

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

> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:56:27 +0000, Ben Bacarisse
> <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>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?
>
> All right, here are all the gory details :
>
>   var x = "2";
>   "" + ((+x) + 4)  // "6"
>
> This separates the various kinds of action being performed. If +x is
> not a common idiom in the development team then the rather cumbersome
> Number(x) replaces it.

Thanks.  Obviously we have very different views of what looks obscure.
I like the left-to-right clarity of

  +x + 4 + ""

but I won't argue it.

-- 
Ben.

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

Thread

Re: Writing type conversions John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-11-23 18:34 +0000
  Re: Writing type conversions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-11-23 20:11 +0000
    Re: Writing type conversions Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2020-11-24 09:49 +0100
      Re: Writing type conversions Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-11-24 10:58 +0100
        Re: Writing type conversions Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2020-11-24 18:56 +0100
      Re: Writing type conversions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-11-24 11:48 +0000
    Re: Writing type conversions John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-11-24 18:34 +0000
      Re: Writing type conversions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-11-24 21:56 +0000
        Re: Writing type conversions John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-11-25 15:32 +0000
          Re: Writing type conversions Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-11-25 10:29 -0800
          Re: Writing type conversions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-11-25 19:58 +0000
            Re: Writing type conversions Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-11-26 16:47 -0800
  Re: Writing type conversions Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2020-11-24 09:56 +0100

csiph-web