replace wierd syntax with clear expression #4814
Merged
Conversation
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
dougwilson suggested changes Feb 6, 2022
LinusU reviewed Feb 6, 2022
| FYI, you can ignore the CI failures; a transient dependency just published a version that broke it; I'll get that addressed when I get home and otherwise your PR I think is good to go. |
dougwilson force-pushed the thst71-removes-use-arcane-syntax branch from 9bb1a59 to bb26325 Compare dougwilson approved these changes Feb 7, 2022
dougwilson pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2022
himanshiLt pushed a commit to himanshiLt/express that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
3 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 Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The use of
!~hides the completely understandableapiKeys.indexOf(key) < 0orif(!apiKeys.includes(key)).Since this is example code, this should be crisp and clean.
I don't see any advantage or improvement in the use of a "bitwise negation of -1 is 0 and thus falsy, so I can use a boolean not on it for my if statement" to replace a straight "result is less than 0". I even would consider it is slower than a simple compare, since it's two operations. The newer API (includes) is even more literate in coding style.
I suggest this is fixed.