> Le 13 avr. 2017 à 08:39, T.J. Crowder <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > In the thread on [strict relational operators][1], felix [suggested][2] an > expression mode affecting all operators: > > > Maybe every operator can have a non-coercing variant? > > > > One possible syntax is to have a modifier on operators > > > > x = a (<) b (+) c (&&) (!)d; > > > > if (x (!=) y) ... > > > > > > Another possible syntax is to have a modifier on expressions > > > > x = #(a < b + c && !d) > > > > if #(x != y) ... > > I though the idea deserved its own thread. It's much broader in scope than > strict relational operators, and not exclusive with them. >
I think that, in general, “implicit coercion” is not the real issue, although it makes things worse in some cases. The real issue is “ambivalent meaning”. For example, `+` is so problematic in JS because it has two contradictory meanings: addition and concatenation. On the other hand, `<` is less problematic, because there is much rarely a situation where it is ambiguous (for a human). Another example: ```js var a = new Date var b = new Date(a) a <= b // true a < b // false a == b // probably not what you mean ``` In this case, “stricter” is not helpful in the “equality” test. What would have helped, is comparison operators with non-ambivalent meanings. E.g., Perl has `==` for numerical comparison, `eq` for string comparison, and, since v6, `eqv` for structural comparison, `===` for identity comparison, `=:=` for... —Claude _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
