Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"Operator precedence": yield and =; ?? and || #5365

Closed
js-choi opened this issue May 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10479
Closed

"Operator precedence": yield and =; ?? and || #5365

js-choi opened this issue May 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10479
Labels
Content:JS JavaScript docs help wanted If you know something about this topic, we would love your help!

Comments

@js-choi
Copy link
Contributor

js-choi commented May 27, 2021

MDN URL: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Operator_Precedence

@bakkot brought this to my attention: There are at least two inaccuracies in the JavaScript operator-precedence table.

As an aside, I also find puzzling the inclusion of = as an operator but the exclusion of =>. Both tokens create expressions. And neither = nor => are actually binary operators over two expressions (both their left sides are evaluated as variable bindings, not expressions). = and => even have equal precedence in the spec (AssignmentExpression again). Calling = but not => an operator seems arbitrary.

MDN Content page report details
@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker added Content:JS JavaScript docs help wanted If you know something about this topic, we would love your help! 30 minute task labels Jun 4, 2021
js-choi added a commit to js-choi/mdn-content that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 19, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Content:JS JavaScript docs help wanted If you know something about this topic, we would love your help!
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants