~ is a bitwise NOT operator - flipping all the bits in a number. Flipping them twice gets you back to the original number. Using it with undefined (what you'll get from the optional chain if order is missing) or any falsy value - is the same as using it with 0
I am making the presumption here that order will be an integer. The solution I suggest will also remove the decimal part from any order value
Presumably you are using optional chaining here as you are expecting a or b to possibly be undefined or null? If this is not the case, you don't even need optional chaining and could simply use:
~is a bitwise NOT operator - flipping all the bits in a number. Flipping them twice gets you back to the original number. Using it withundefined(what you'll get from the optional chain iforderis missing) or any falsy value - is the same as using it with 0I am making the presumption here that
orderwill be an integer. The solution I suggest will also remove the decimal part from anyordervaluePresumably you are using optional chaining here as you are expecting
aorbto possibly beundefinedornull? If this is not the case, you don't even need optional chaining and could simply use:Hey Jon, yes I am assuming the values to null or undefined, and that's the reason why I am using optional changing..
However, using your approach wouldn't
~~undefindedbreak the code ? 🤔As I said,
~~undefinedgives0umm, interesting way.. never used it though, however not sure if this is the best practise or not..
Best practises should always be challenged and questioned
Agreed, there's always more then one to do the stuff, whatever works best !