Please, JS is crap in multiple ways, but bad faith is just boring
-
That standard uses an interesting way of defining numbers. In any case, JS has chosen its string conversion so that tonumber(tostring(x))==x and the string has a minumum number of significant digits. 754 does not define conversions to string
754 defines conversion to integer and common sense says the returned string represents an integer when it's just digits. If you choose to claim it doesn't, then we can agree JS doesn't violate 754, it instead violates common sense and the principle of least surprise.
-
-
IOW: if defending JS requires claiming that the text 4611686018427387904 unambiguously represents a float and not an integer, you've already lost.
-
JS not having an integer type nor a bignum is where we've all lost in the first place.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
A machine integer is not a string unless you're talking COBOL (and even COBOL tends to BCD-pack values). Stop conflating conversion to string and conversion to integer, it's *not* the same thing.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.