1035
JavaScript (lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Gsus4@mander.xyz 115 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Hm, playing devil's advocate, I think it is because the minus has not been defined as a string operation (e.g. it could pop the last char), so it defaults to the mathematical operation and converts both inputs into ints.

The first is assumed to be a concat because one of the parcels is a string...

It's just doing a lot of stuff for you that it shouldn't be in first place 🤭

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 week ago

Yup. It's completely inconsistent in its interpretation of the + operator.

[-] Gsus4@mander.xyz 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, I actually had to try 1+"11" to check that it didn't give me 12, but thankfully ~~it commutes~~ it's consistent 😇

[-] palordrolap@fedia.io 19 points 1 week ago

it commutes

Maybe the behaviour with regard to type conversion, but not for the operation itself.

"13"+12 and 12+"13" don't yield the same result.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Nor would I expect "1312" to equal "1213".. Still that operator with these operands should just throw an exception

[-] palordrolap@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago

Given it's JavaScript, which was expressly designed to carry on regardless, I could see an argument for it returning NaN, (or silently doing what Perl does, like I mention in a different comment) but then there'd have to be an entirely different way of concatenating strings.

expressly designed to carry on regardless

I'm surprised they didn't borrow On Error Resume Next from Visual Basic. Which was wrongly considered to be the worst thing in Visual Basic - when the real worst thing was On Error Resume. On Error Resume Next at least moved on to the next line of code when an error occurred; On Error Resume just executed the error-generating line again ... and again ... and again ... and again ...

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Why would you need an entirely different way of concatenating strings? "11" + 1 -> exception. "11" + to_string(1) = "111"

[-] palordrolap@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago

You're right. I've got too much Perl on the brain and forgot my roots. There is a language that does what you're talking about with the '+' operator: BASIC

Good luck getting the same thing retrofitted into JavaScript though. I can imagine a large number of websites would break or develop mysterious problems if this (mis)behaviour was fixed.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I don't think there's a way to retrofit JS - but php versions are deprecated all the time. Why not do the same with client-side script versions? :)

[-] 0x0@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 week ago

It's just doing a lot of stuff for you that it shouldn't be in first place 🤭

Kinda like log4j!

[-] dalekcaan@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago

Yeah, this looks dumb on the surface, but you've got bigger problems if you're trying to do math with strings

[-] Klear@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

Better than doing physics with strings

this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
1035 points (98.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

24079 readers
1070 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS