On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote: > On 6/6/14, 3:19 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >> >> Can we make is() do those checks explicitly and if neither of these >> cases apply, fall back to a non-strict equality check? > > > Yes. As in, we could make it special-case the number-to-string compare and > use == for that, and use === for everything else.
I don't see why we would want to do that though. We should test that we get the expected result, not approximately the expected result. Something that passes our test might very well break a real-world web page. I.e. having a function that returns "0.4", but where the spec says to return 0.4 should result in a test failure, since returning "0.4" might very well break the web. I definitely understand that it'll be a pain to convert existing tests that rely on the relaxed matching. But rather than making the implementation of is() be more complex and/or more relaxed, could we instead convert those tests to either is_relaxed(a, b) or ok(a == b) / Jonas _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
