James Graham wrote: > David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: >> Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >>> Finally, there is another approach to resolving this issue. Define a >>> new global function, parseInteger, that does the "right thing" and >>> relegate parseInt to Annex B. >> >> That's not a bad idea, given that parseInt has the additional flaw of >> silently stopping at the first invalid character, which this change >> will not fix. But it should be a "static" method of Number, not a global, >> to avoid further polluting the global namespace and potentially clashing >> with existing user functions. > > It seems like having two functions with the same usecase but subtly > different semantics contributes significantly to the cognitive burden of > learning the language, and of reading other people's code, without — at > least in this case — providing a huge number of clear cut benefits.
Reporting an error when there are invalid characters in the string, rather than silently returning the wrong value in that case, is a clear-cut benefit. parseInt is not particularly useful to programmers who actually care about input validation. (If you validate that a string represents a decimal integer first, then you could just as well use 'Number(s)' or '+s' to convert it to a number.) -- David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ _______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
