Proposal: Boolean.parseBoolean

Dmitry Soshnikov dmitry.soshnikov at gmail.com
Mon Mar 20 20:53:46 UTC 2017


On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:

> As mentioned in the gist, and FWIW, -1 here.
>
> `/^true$/i.test(str)` works since ever for the specified use case
>
> `Boolean.parseBoolean(1)` that returns `false` is a footgun.
>
> Either we talk about a better definition of truthy-like values, or having
> a public spec about just string type and `true` as value looks like the
> solution for 1% of use cases that's also already covered by `JSON.parse`
>
>>
>>
Still, semantics matter :) With a `JSON.parse` you may parse any JSON
value, and then will have to do extra checks. RegExp test is also less
semantic. Initially in the thread I considered truthy/falsey values, but
then reduced to strings only, and took Java's implementation, but this can
be discussed. The need for a semantic method from `Boolean` still exists,
instead of using ad-hoc technics like JSON or regexp, which are just
implementation details for the semantic method.

Dmitry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20170320/fa387443/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list