Isn't it tricky?
My understanding:
null == undefined
null != 0
null != ""
0 == ""
0 == false
"" == false
so "if (x)..." will be false for x = 0, "", null, or undefined
and "if (x==null)" will only be true for null or undefined, not 0 or ""
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Angel Herráez
> I took the opportunity to get rid of references to "undefined" ---
> let me know if you think I'm in error there.
Sorry, I cannot say. I have no authority on these things. And the &&
syntax confuses me.
All I have previously read about these things is to use "typeof" and
to use strict equali
full fix is at
http://sourceforge.net/p/jsmol/code/269/tree//trunk/jsmoljs/Jmol2.js
diff is:
http://sourceforge.net/p/jsmol/code/269/tree//trunk/jsmoljs/Jmol2.js?diff=190
I took the opportunity to get rid of references to "undefined" --- let me
know if you think I'm in error there.
On Thu,
setting it to this:
function jmolSetTarget(targetSuffix) {
targetSuffix != null && (_jmol.targetSuffix = targetSuffix);
return _jmol.target = "jmolApplet" + _jmol.targetSuffix;
}
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Robert Hanson wrote:
> ...no, that's not quite right.It may be coming in as "
...no, that's not quite right.It may be coming in as "undefined". You want:
if (targetSuffix == null)...
This has confused me for a long time. Doesn't help to have misinformation
such as
http://saladwithsteve.com/2008/02/javascript-undefined-vs-null.html
out there. TOTALLY incorrect advice --
sure. that should read
if (arguments.length < 1)...
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Angel Herráez wrote:
> Dear Bob,
> I've found a bug in Jmol2.js -- which otherwise is being a very
> useful tool!
> http://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jsmol/Jmol2.js
>
> function jmolSetTarget(targetSuffix) {
>
Dear Bob,
I've found a bug in Jmol2.js -- which otherwise is being a very
useful tool!
http://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jsmol/Jmol2.js
function jmolSetTarget(targetSuffix) {
if (targetSuffix)_jmol.targetSuffix = targetSuffix;
return _jmol.target = "jmolApplet" + _jmol.targetSuffix;
}
When a p
