And even in the one case where == says they are the same, you can fix that by making sure you are using === so that it doesn’t do type coercion for the comparison.
What’s confusing about that? It’s null, just two different kinds with slightly different meanings. Is having two boolean values also confusing?! Should we simplify it?
I mean I can get behind trying to remove null entirely and replacing it with better concepts, but I cannot understand why having one more null value suddenly makes it confusing. You don’t even have to care in 95% of the cases, and it can be useful in the other 5%.
Honestly, it looks more like some kind of misguided purism to me.
That’s not true these days. You can try it yourself right in your browser’s dev console.
These results are from Firefox’s console.
0 == null == undefined > false 0 == null > false 0 == undefined > false null == undefined > true null === undefined > falseAnd even in the one case where
==says they are the same, you can fix that by making sure you are using===so that it doesn’t do type coercion for the comparison.Shhhhh, bashing Javascript is cool around here.
Just make fun of it for having two flavors of null.
So what’s wrong with having two flavors of null?
It’s super confusing. A lot of people think even one null is a problem.
What’s confusing about that? It’s null, just two different kinds with slightly different meanings. Is having two boolean values also confusing?! Should we simplify it?
I mean I can get behind trying to remove null entirely and replacing it with better concepts, but I cannot understand why having one more null value suddenly makes it confusing. You don’t even have to care in 95% of the cases, and it can be useful in the other 5%.
Honestly, it looks more like some kind of misguided purism to me.
Why stop at two? Why not have a dozen versions of null?
Idk, how many more do you need?