Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [jslint] Method operations on string literals in concatenation chains

Expand Messages
  • Emmett Pickerel
    Most recently, I ve been doing a lot of embed codes (object + params + embed). I break them into multiple lines to aid readability, as they tend to be quite
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Most recently, I've been doing a lot of embed codes (object + params + embed). I break them into multiple lines to aid readability, as they tend to be quite long and would wrap in odd places.


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Erik Eckhardt <erik@...>
      To: jslint_com@yahoogroups.com
      Cc:
      Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2011, 8:37
      Subject: Re: [jslint] Method operations on string literals in concatenation chains

      Why concatenate string literals together, anyway?

      A = "a" + "b" + "c".replace();

      seems like it simply ought to be:

      A = "abc".replace();

      Perhaps it is multi-line strings that introduce bugs more than improper
      parentheses for the replace function.

      On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Luke Page <luke.a.page@...> wrote:

      > **
      >
      >
      > You have to be concatenating a massive number of strings for that to make
      > real world difference. Otherwise it is just needlessly complicating things.
      >
      > Ideally for best clarity and separation your html template will be defined
      > separate from your template mechanism and separate from logic generating
      > your replacement values.
      >
      > Partly because of this I can't think of any times I've seen a bug along
      > these lines. The most common intention in code I've seen would be the case
      > you don't want! I would rather be forced to write
      > A = "b"+"c";
      > A = A.x();
      >
      > For your case and I certainly don't think it looks nice having to write
      >
      > A = "b" + ("c").x();
      >
      > You might as well require every expression have brackets to ensure the
      > programmer doesn't have a bad knowledge of operator precedence (which I
      > already do in non obvious cases). I'd consider this a reasonably obvious
      > case.
      >
      > What do people think about operator precedence / bracket usage in general -
      > are there any rules everyone agrees would be useful?
      >
      > On 7 Jul 2011 07:49, "Rob Richardson" <erobrich@...> wrote:
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >

      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.