Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2024. It is now read-only.

[WIP][RFC] Introduce JavaScript null value #1310

Open
saper wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[WIP][RFC] Introduce JavaScript null value #1310

saper wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

@saper
Copy link
Member

@saper saper commented Dec 20, 2015

I believe that having Sass.NULL (and Sass.TRUE,
Sass.FALSE) is incorrect. We should be using
real JavaScript primitives instead, if only
to avoid object identity issues, or to allow
natural constructs like:

done(a === b)

I suggest assigning JavaScript 'null' to
sass.NULL and sass.types.Null.NULL names.

Current stage:

  • handling primitive null values
  • handling null items in list
  • handling null keys and values in maps
  • "a instanceof sass.types.Null" does not work

An attempt to instantiate sass.NULL object via:

 new sass.types.Null()

gives a different error message now:

 TypeError: sass.types.Null is not a function

saper added 5 commits December 20, 2015 00:35
@saper
Handle sass.NULL returned from the importer via done()
f54461a 
Whenever done() is called we should check for the sass.NULL
value as well.

While here, allow calling done(null) to anticipate
removal of the sass.NULL one day.

Fixes sass#1296
@saper
Experimental use of JavaScript null
562ef66
@saper
assert(a === b) => assert.strictEqual(a, b)
12d9b54 
When the test fails, we are getting actual
values in the error message instead of

+ true
= false
@saper
sass.types.Null() test should be implementation independent
339396c 
If we implement sass.types.Null as an Object it gives
a different error message.
@saper
Less bureaucracy for Nan::ThrowTypeError
713e905
@saper saper self-assigned this Dec 20, 2015
@saper saper added this to the primitive types milestone Dec 20, 2015
@saper saper mentioned this pull request Dec 20, 2015
Open
@saper
Copy link
Member Author

saper commented Dec 26, 2015

I don't think that "null instanceof sass.types.Null" could be made true, I'd rather modify our test instead (not to depend on the implementation internals).

@xzyfer
Copy link
Contributor

xzyfer commented Dec 27, 2015

I'm not convinced this is a good idea discussed briefly in #1088 (comment)

I would hold off on this until we reach a consensus on #1320

@saper saper mentioned this pull request Jan 5, 2016
Closed
@saper saper force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 6c128d9 to 1e4bba8 Compare April 19, 2016 21:45
@saper saper mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2016
Open
jiongle1 pushed a commit to scantist-ossops-m2/node-sass that referenced this pull request Apr 7, 2024
@xzyfer
Merge pull request sass#1310 from saper/namespaces
354801c 
Clean up C++ namespaces
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@saper saper

Labels

API - Custom Functions Dev - WIP Discussion - Proposal Module - Binding

Projects

None yet

Milestone

primitive types

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@saper @xzyfer