6 ms·

"Internet expert" == ! expert

• rapind 14y ago
  "==!" === "Bad Javascript idiom you won't find in many other languages."
  • ricardobeat 14y ago
    "==!" === "x == !y" which you find in most languages.
  • masklinn 14y ago
    > Bad Javascript idiom you won't find in many other languages. It's not an idiom, and identity tests exist in other languages. You may know them as "==" (Java), "is" (Python), "eq?" (Scheme) or "object.ReferenceEquals" (C#). Now the syntax is ugly and this does not excuse the fucked up non-overridable equality, but aside from that `===` works pretty well in Javascript. As opposed to PHP, which famously did manage to even fail implementing identity correctly[0]. It also has nothing to do with the comment you replied to, which uses `== !` (to operators, an equality to a negated operand) [0] http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204433&cid=16703529 http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204433&ci...
    • StavrosK 14y ago
      This is irrelevant, but it blows my mind that "[1] == [1]" returns False in JS.
      • masklinn 14y ago
        I'm "ok" with that, it's a property of non-overridable equality tests, where arrays are "standard objects" (with natively implemented lots of things, but still objects) rather than built-in magical special cases of the language (although there are still things done by arrays I don't think you can do without recent extensions to the spec, such as js> var a = [] js> a[42] = 3 3 js> a.length 43 ) as opposed to e.g. Go where a few blessed types have access to features Go users do not have any possible access to. It bothers me significantly more that [1] == 1 does not return false in JS. Although the rules through which this is reached are clear.
  • Symmetry 14y ago
    Hmm, I parsed that C style as: "internet experts" == not experts Notice the space between the last = and the !
  • anthonyb 14y ago
    Refactored for rapind's benefit: "Internet expert" == (! expert) ;)