• RagingToad@feddit.nl
      31·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure if you really want to know, but:

      greater than, smaller than, will cast the type so it will be 0>0 which is false, ofcourse. 0>=0 is true.

      Now == will first compare types, they are different types so it’s false.

      Also I’m a JavaScript Dev and if I ever see someone I work with use these kind of hacks I’m never working together with them again unless they apologize a lot and wash their dirty typing hands with… acid? :-)

      edit: as several people already pointed out, my answer is not accurate. The real solution was mentioned by mycus

      • hstde@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        1·
        1 year ago

        Not a JavaScript dev here, but I work with it. Doesn’t “==” do type coercion, though? Isn’t that why “===” exists?

        As far as I know the operators “>=” and “<=” are implemented as the negation of “<” and “>” respectively. Why: because when you are working with sticky ordered sets, like natural numbers, those operators work.

        Thus “0<=0” -> “!(0>0)” -> “!(false)” -> “true”

        Correct me if my thinking is wrong though.

  • Mars@beehaw.org
    3·
    1 year ago

    I know it’s a joke, but it’s an old one and it doesn’t make a lot of sense in this day and age.

    Why are you comparing null to numbers? Shouldn’t you be assuring your values are valid first? Why are you using the “cast everything to the type you see fit and compare” operator?

    Other languages would simply fail. Once more JavaScript greatest sin is not throwing an exception when you ask it to do things that don’t make sense.

    • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.mlOP
      3·
      1 year ago

      Shouldn’t you be assuring your values are valid first?

      Step 1: Get to prod

      Step 2-10: Add features

      Step 11: Sell the company before it bites you