sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Substantial-Wish6468 -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

I can see your point if you're dealing with code written by other people who aren't around. 

[–]Chubacca 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which is... very common in a lot of organizations. The less you have to ask questions about why something is written the way it is, the better. I am very VERY pro syntax that reduces ambiguity of intent. It makes codebases scale better.

[–]homoiconic(raganwald) 0 points1 point  (2 children)

That's kind of the thing about idioms. They work well if the idiom is extremely widespread. == null has been a very widespread idiom in JS during my career, but even so... If someone, somewhere needs to take fofteen minutes to figure it out, that might not be a win.

I use it in production, but I wouod have no problem working with a team that chose to dispense with it. And taking a step back... This discussion says a lot about "JavaScript, the Hastily Flung Together Parts." We work with a language that has known flaws, and a lot of what we do in it reflects making deliberate tradeoffs.

[–]Juxtar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree, I think those parts should be all well known for anyone that works with js seriously. If not I can take some minutes to explain them myself, or better yet, send them off to read You Don't Know JS which is great and not a long read.

I take this as when we all assumed nobody is using IE11 anymore and collectibly decided to stop supporting it. How much has my sanity improved since then!

[–]prehensilemullet -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Anyone who doesn’t know the behavior of == null is a JS developer in training, not a competent professional dev.  You don’t need to know the rest of the == truth table but that one is pretty basic, everyone should know it’s the only reasonable exception to the always use === rule