or you just write undefined instead of void(0) or void 0. On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:48 AM, אריה גלזר <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Though even this use-case is synthetic, since this check, first, can be >> replaced with checking typeof foo == "undefined", and second -- in ES5 it's >> fixed, > > > Well, writing void(0) is shorter and harder to misspell... > > -- > Arieh Glazer > אריה גלזר > 052-5348-561 > http://www.arieh.co.il > http://www.link-wd.co.il > > -- > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<jsmentors%[email protected]> > -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
