FWIW, ActionScript seems to have a unary plus as well. http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ActionScript/3.0_ProgrammingAS3/WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118a9b90204-7fd1.html#WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118a9b90204-7f69
On Jan 2, 2017, at 11:09 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 2, 2017, at 7:34 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> Where can I read more about this syntax? > > https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Arithmetic_Operators#Unary_plus_() > >> Does the difference really move the needle? Does GCC optimizer replace >> Number with a shortened name anyway? > > IFAIK, GCC leaves Number() as is. I just searched a current minimized project > and there were 137 Number() casts. That would be a savings of 959 bytes. The > entire minimized file is 402 KB. We’d possibly have an extra space before the > unary plus, but even so, it would be a savings of 822 bytes. > >> What if you take away all whitespace? > > I think it depends on where. 20 + +”1234” works, while 20++”1234” fails > miserably with the following error: Uncaught ReferenceError: Invalid > left-hand side expression in postfix operation > var foo=+”1234”; works fine. > >> What should we generate for: >> >> var bar = "1234"; >> var foo = Number(bar); >> > > var bar = "1234"; > var foo = +bar; > >> var foo = Number("12" + "34”); > > Good question. > +("12" + "34") probably makes the most sense for this case. > > >> Sorry for all of the questions. I'm trying to understand how much gain we >> get for how much work. >> >> Thanks, >> -Alex >> >> On 1/2/17, 9:23 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Or more concisely: >>> >>> console.log(20 + +"1234") >>> < 1254 >>> >>> On Jan 2, 2017, at 7:21 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Apparently, yes: >>>> >>>>> var foo = 20 + +"1234"; >>>> < undefined >>>>> foo >>>> < 1254 >>>> >>>> On Jan 2, 2017, at 7:13 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> var foo = 20 + +"1234"; >>>> >>> >> >
