Good price.

  • Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I think its type system is “okay”, I mean inherently dynamic typing is pretty error-prone. But its type coercion algorithms are bonkers. Also that whole “NaN ≠ NaN” business…

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also that whole “NaN ≠ NaN” business…

      See that’s one of the parts that is actually almost in line with other languages. In Go, for example, nilnil because nil is, by definition, undefined. You can’t say whether one thing that you know nothing about is at all like something else that you know nothing about. It really should raise an exception at the attempt to compare NaN though.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            You’d first check for nil values

            What does this mean, if not the same as

            then compare like normal

            ?

            • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              IIRC, a nil value can be checked against a literal successfully but not against another nil value. Say you want to check for equality of two vars that could be nil. You just need an extra if statement to ensure that you are not trying to compare nil and nil or nil and a non-nil value (that’ll give you a type error or NPE):

              var a *string
              var b *string
              
              ...
              if a != nil && b != nil {
                if a == b {
                  fmt.Println("Party!")
                } else {
                  fmt.Println("Also Party!")
              }