1034

JavaScript (lemmy.ml)

submitted 6 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

158 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 5 days ago

In https://lemm.ee/comment/20947041 they claimed "implicit type coercion" and showed many examples; they did NOT claim "string concatenation".
However, that was in reply to https://lemmy.world/comment/17473361 which was talking about "implicit conversion to string" which is a specific type of "implicit type coercion"; NONE of the examples given involved a conversion to string.
But also, that was in reply to https://lemm.ee/comment/20939144 which only mentions "implicit type coercion" in general.

So, I think probably everyone in the thread is "correct", but you are actually talking past one another.

I think the JS behavior is a bad design choice, but it is well documented and consistent across implementations.

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

Read the thread again, it seems you slipped somewhere. This was all about the claim that implicit conversion to string somehow could make sense.

this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025

1034 points (98.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

24045 readers

1929 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