FWIW another disadvantage is that operators cannot be polyfilled, so it'll take forever for those not using transpilers to adopt these, while having a `Math,mod` would work right away
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:40 AM Claude Pache <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le 12 août 2019 à 22:00, Matthew Morgan <[email protected]> a écrit : > > JS needs a modulo operator. It currently has the remainder operator `%` > which works in most cases except for negative values. I believe the the > `%%` would work great and be easy to remember. > > let x = (-13) %% 64; > is equivalent to > let x = ((-13 % 64) + 64) % 64; > > > Is there a strong advantage of an `%%` operator over a `Math.mod()` > function? There is the precedent of the `**` operator implemented as > alternative of `Math.pow()` few years ago. It would be interesting to hear > the feedback of those that use regularly powers, whether the benefit was > clear (personally, I almost never use either `Math.pow()` or `**`, so that > I can’t say anything). > > At least one disadvantage of an operator over a function, is that you have > to think about precedence. The problem is exacerbated in JS, because > (following some other languages) the unary minus has an uncanny high > precedence level, confusingly very different than the one of the binary > minus; so that, after having designed `**`, it was realised at the last > minute that `-a**b` would be dumbly interpreted as `(-a)**b` instead of > `-(a**b)` or `0-a**b`, as anybody who would be likely to actually use the > operator would expect. (That particular issue was resolved in a hurry by > making the parenthesis-left form a syntax error.) > > —Claude > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
