On 2/19/07, Tobie Langel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> However, when I see the plethora of ways we currently test to see if a
> variable is undefined:
>
>     typeof example == 'undefined'
>     example === undefined


I think the middle one is the cheapest (both first are correct).

    example == undefined (is that correct btw?)


Depending on what you need to check. Sometimes you want to treat null and
undefined the same, sometimes you don't. Let's not have these discussions, I
had too much back in the PHP world. It always depends on what you're doing
in the code.

I'm sure there's something we could do about this.
>
> So there's another proposition I just though of, introducing the "is"
> namespace:


Actually, I like your "is" namespace a lot! But - would the name be
obtrusive? What if someone defines "is" variable in the global namespace (on
the window object), will closures save subsequent calls to real "is" in the
framework?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to