Hacker News Reader

I don't think it is useful to know the behaviour of JS in such cases. In practice, you rarely compare strings with numbers, or objects with booleans.

I wrote tens of thousands of lines of JS (e.g. this library https://github.com/photopea/UPNG.js ), I never used "===" in my life :D

View on HN

The implicit coercion rules don't matter if you make sure to convert the types explicitly, but then you're just relying on your discipline. You might be able to pull it off individually, but it starts mattering more when working with other people.

Also, from a brief glance at your code example, you don't seem to have caught up with other current best practices like linting or modules.

You don't have to rely on discipline, you can use tooling like ESLint or Flow to make sure there are no implicit conversions in the codebase.

eslint absolutely can't figure out whether '==' will implicitly convert its arguments or not.

The type information simply is not there.

eslint can disallow == for anything but `== null`. Problem solved.

https://eslint.org/docs/rules/eqeqeq

This thread is about not using `===`; it's obviously true that it can be disallowed entirely, but it can't be allowed based on whether or not it will coerce, which was the context of the thread.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com