Use typeof to test booleaness. - #696
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Using the typeof check is shorter, and in case of Chrome also faster at this point as shown in https://esbench.com/bench/591b46f299634800a03481f8 (upstream bug to address this at http://crbug.com/v8/6403). I personally also find the typeof version more readable, as it makes it clear what the intent was.
robertknight
approved these changes
May 21, 2017
robertknight
left a comment
robertknight
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. I ran the benchmark in Chrome, Safari & Firefox. The difference was largest in Firefox, smallest in Safari and mid-way between those in Chrome Dev.
Member
|
Any impact on filesize? That was the original reasoning behind the strict equality checks, but maybe the impact is small enough it's worthwhile. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Using the typeof check is shorter, and in case of Chrome also faster at
this point as shown in https://esbench.com/bench/591b46f299634800a03481f8
(upstream bug to address this at http://crbug.com/v8/6403). I personally
also find the typeof version more readable, as it makes it clear what
the intent was.