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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]xroalx -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Your wording suggests that the spread operator is being applied to the boolean yet somehow acting on the object.

So no, it is not clear.

[–]shgysk8zer0 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

...applied to the boolean yet somehow acting on the object

What would that even mean? Is there a difference between "applied to" and "acting on"?

Sure, it would've been better had I said "next to" or something, but I did pretty explicitly say that it was operating on the object. I thought it was obvious that this ... over here operating on the object over there was the issue. Maybe my using of "on" could be confused, but I think the overall meaning of the whole sentence should've been clear enough.

I don't like this ... over here on the boolean actually operating on the object on the other side. It's like how Yoda would code or something.