4 ms·
I think it was the correct move IMO. I find `print x` more confusing than `print(x)`. Same with the typeof statement in js. If something has an input, it should
by conradludgate 7y ago
I think it was the correct move IMO. I find `print x` more confusing than `print(x)`. Same with the typeof statement in js. If something has an input, it should express that in some consistent way.
- eropple 7y agotypeof in JavaScript is a unary operator, not a statement or a function. Which makes sense and squares with instanceof. It would be bonkers for print to be a unary operator because it's just a side effect, and so I feel that your point in this situation is correct where it would not be in your other examples.