The JScript Type System, Part Three: If It Walks Like A Duck...
reader asks "can
you explain the logic that a string is not always a String but
a regexp is always a RegExp?
What is the recommended way of determining if a value is a string?"
you are correct:
instanceof RegExp); //
RegExp("foo") instanceof RegExp); // true
instanceof String); //
String("bar") instanceof String); // true
off, the question about strings. In JScript
there is this bizarre feature where primitive values -- Booleans, strings, numbers
-- can be "wrapped up" into objects. Doing
so leads to some bizarre situations. First
off, as you note, the type of a wrapped primitive is always an object type, not a
primitive type. Also, we use object equality,
not value equality.
String("bar") == new String("bar")); // false
highly recommend against using wrapped primitives. Why
do they exist? Well, the reasoning has
kind of been lost in the mists of time, but one good reason is to make the prototype
inheritance system consistent. If "bar"
is not an object then how is it possible to say
Well, actually, from the point of view of the specification, this is just a syntactic
of course as an implementation detail we do not actually cons
up a new object every time you call a property on a value type! That
would be a performance nightmare. The
runtime engine is smart enough to realize that it has a value type and that it ought
to pass it as the "this" object to the appropriate method on String.prototype and
everything just kind of works out.
also explains why it is possible to stick properties onto value types that magically
disappear. When you say
course what is happening is logically equivalent to:
String(bar)).hello = "hello";
String(bar)).hello); // nada!
the magical temporary object is just that -- magical and temporary. Once
you've used it, poof, it disappears.
this magical temporary object does not appear when the typeof or instanceof operators
are involved. The instanceof operator
says "hey, this thing isn't even an object, so it can't possibly be an instance of
anything". For both consistency and usability,
it would have been nice if "bar"
instanceof String created
a temporary object and hence said yes, it is an instance of String. But
for whatever reason, that's not the specification that the committee came up with.
your question about regular expressions is easily answered now that we know what is
going on with strings. The difference
between regular expressions and strings is that regular
expressions are not primitives. Just
because you have the ability to express a regular expression as a literal does
not mean that it is a primitive! That
thing is always an object, so there is no behaviour difference between the compile-time-literal
syntax and the runtime syntax.
your question about how to determine whether something is a string is surprisingly
tricky. If typeof returns "string" then
obviously it is a string, end of story. But
what if typeof returns "object" --
how can you tell if that thing is a wrapped string?
not easy. instanceof
tell you whether that thing is a string, it tells you whether String.prototype is
on the prototype chain. There's nothing
stopping you from saying
= new MyString();
== String); //
instanceof String); //
now what are you going to do? JScript
is excessively dynamic! Basically you
can't rely on any object being what it says it is. JScript
forces people to be operationalists. (Operationalism
is the philosophical belief that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a
duck.) In the face of the kind of weirdness
described above, all you can do is try to use the thing like a string, and if it acts
like a string, it s a string.