Why does {. . . .0} evaluate to {}?












49














I just found {....0} in friend's code. Evaluating it in console returns {} (empty object).



Why is that? What is the meaning of 4 dots in JavaScript?






javascript spread-syntax number-literal







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 9




    Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
    – Jeremy Harris
    2 days ago










  • This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
    – Salman A
    yesterday






  • 1




    Always relevant
    – MikeTheLiar
    yesterday












  • @JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
    – Pac0
    yesterday
















49














I just found {....0} in friend's code. Evaluating it in console returns {} (empty object).



Why is that? What is the meaning of 4 dots in JavaScript?






javascript spread-syntax number-literal







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 9




    Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
    – Jeremy Harris
    2 days ago










  • This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
    – Salman A
    yesterday






  • 1




    Always relevant
    – MikeTheLiar
    yesterday












  • @JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
    – Pac0
    yesterday














49












49








49


8





I just found {....0} in friend's code. Evaluating it in console returns {} (empty object).



Why is that? What is the meaning of 4 dots in JavaScript?






javascript spread-syntax number-literal







share|improve this question









New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I just found {....0} in friend's code. Evaluating it in console returns {} (empty object).



Why is that? What is the meaning of 4 dots in JavaScript?






javascript spread-syntax number-literal




javascript spread-syntax number-literal






share|improve this question









New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago





















New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









Mist

35937




35937




New contributor




Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Mist is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 9




    Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
    – Jeremy Harris
    2 days ago










  • This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
    – Salman A
    yesterday






  • 1




    Always relevant
    – MikeTheLiar
    yesterday












  • @JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
    – Pac0
    yesterday














  • 9




    Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
    – Jeremy Harris
    2 days ago










  • This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
    – Salman A
    yesterday






  • 1




    Always relevant
    – MikeTheLiar
    yesterday












  • @JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
    – Pac0
    yesterday








9




9




Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
– Jeremy Harris
2 days ago




Viewed almost 2500 times in 6 hours? It appears your friend is using the spread operator in a different context.
– Jeremy Harris
2 days ago












This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
– Salman A
yesterday




This is more of a "how this expression is parsed" question. Type this in JS console and you'll notice that the 4th dot is colored differently... same color as zero.
– Salman A
yesterday




1




1




Always relevant
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday






Always relevant
– MikeTheLiar
yesterday














@JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
– Pac0
yesterday




@JeremyHarris the magic of HNQ
– Pac0
yesterday












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















62














Four dots actually have no meaning. ... is the spread operator, and .0 is short for 0.0.



Spreading 0 (or any number) into an object yields an empty object, therefore {}.






share|improve this answer



















  • 9




    Spreading any number yields an empty object.
    – Kresimir
    2 days ago






  • 8




    Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
    – Hitesh Kumar
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








  • 2




    NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago



















41














Three dots in an object literal are a spread property, e.g.:



  const a = { b: 1, c: 1 };

  const d = { ...a, e: 1 }; // { b: 1, c: 1, e: 1 }


The last dot with a 0 is a number literal .0 is the same as 0.0. Therefore this:



 { ...(0.0) }


spreads all properties of the number object into the object, however as numbers don't have any (own) properties you get back an empty object.






share|improve this answer























  • You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    @mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
    – Jonas Wilms
    2 days ago










  • What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
    – Patrick Roberts
    2 days ago



















1














In a simple terms {...} spread operator in javascript extends one object/array with another.



So, when babelifier tries extending one with another, it has to identify whether it is trying to extend an array or an object.



In the case of array, it iterates over elements.



In the case of object, it iterates over keys.



In this scenario, the babelyfier is trying to extract keys for number by checking the Object's own property call which is missing for number so it returns empty Object.






share|improve this answer



















  • 7




    new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
    – uhoh
    yesterday













Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






Mist is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53922010%2fwhy-does-0-evaluate-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









62














Four dots actually have no meaning. ... is the spread operator, and .0 is short for 0.0.



Spreading 0 (or any number) into an object yields an empty object, therefore {}.






share|improve this answer



















  • 9




    Spreading any number yields an empty object.
    – Kresimir
    2 days ago






  • 8




    Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
    – Hitesh Kumar
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








  • 2




    NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago
















62














Four dots actually have no meaning. ... is the spread operator, and .0 is short for 0.0.



Spreading 0 (or any number) into an object yields an empty object, therefore {}.






share|improve this answer



















  • 9




    Spreading any number yields an empty object.
    – Kresimir
    2 days ago






  • 8




    Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
    – Hitesh Kumar
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








  • 2




    NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago














62












62








62






Four dots actually have no meaning. ... is the spread operator, and .0 is short for 0.0.



Spreading 0 (or any number) into an object yields an empty object, therefore {}.






share|improve this answer














Four dots actually have no meaning. ... is the spread operator, and .0 is short for 0.0.



Spreading 0 (or any number) into an object yields an empty object, therefore {}.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered 2 days ago









NikxDa

2,78311531




2,78311531








  • 9




    Spreading any number yields an empty object.
    – Kresimir
    2 days ago






  • 8




    Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
    – Hitesh Kumar
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








  • 2




    NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago














  • 9




    Spreading any number yields an empty object.
    – Kresimir
    2 days ago






  • 8




    Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
    – Hitesh Kumar
    2 days ago






  • 2




    @HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








  • 2




    NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
    – NikxDa
    2 days ago








9




9




Spreading any number yields an empty object.
– Kresimir
2 days ago




Spreading any number yields an empty object.
– Kresimir
2 days ago




8




8




Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
– Hitesh Kumar
2 days ago




Spreading 0 (or any number) yields an empty object not necessarily if you spread a number at any other places apart from an object, it will throw an error eg [...0] throws an error.
– Hitesh Kumar
2 days ago




2




2




@HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
– NikxDa
2 days ago






@HiteshKumar Spreading non-iterable objects inside an array will indeed throw an error, but that has nothing to do with this question. I am referring to the object-spread mentioned. :)
– NikxDa
2 days ago






2




2




NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
– Mist
2 days ago




NikxDa I think that @HiteshKumar made an important point. It's better to be more explicit about cases where your statements holds true. Spreading 0 (or any number) in object literal yields an empty object Contains more useful information..
– Mist
2 days ago




1




1




@Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
– NikxDa
2 days ago




@Mist I've updated the answer. I don't think it's needed, but it might be good for clarification. Thanks for the update!
– NikxDa
2 days ago













41














Three dots in an object literal are a spread property, e.g.:



  const a = { b: 1, c: 1 };

  const d = { ...a, e: 1 }; // { b: 1, c: 1, e: 1 }


The last dot with a 0 is a number literal .0 is the same as 0.0. Therefore this:



 { ...(0.0) }


spreads all properties of the number object into the object, however as numbers don't have any (own) properties you get back an empty object.






share|improve this answer























  • You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    @mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
    – Jonas Wilms
    2 days ago










  • What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
    – Patrick Roberts
    2 days ago
















41














Three dots in an object literal are a spread property, e.g.:



  const a = { b: 1, c: 1 };

  const d = { ...a, e: 1 }; // { b: 1, c: 1, e: 1 }


The last dot with a 0 is a number literal .0 is the same as 0.0. Therefore this:



 { ...(0.0) }


spreads all properties of the number object into the object, however as numbers don't have any (own) properties you get back an empty object.






share|improve this answer























  • You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    @mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
    – Jonas Wilms
    2 days ago










  • What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
    – Patrick Roberts
    2 days ago














41












41








41






Three dots in an object literal are a spread property, e.g.:



  const a = { b: 1, c: 1 };

  const d = { ...a, e: 1 }; // { b: 1, c: 1, e: 1 }


The last dot with a 0 is a number literal .0 is the same as 0.0. Therefore this:



 { ...(0.0) }


spreads all properties of the number object into the object, however as numbers don't have any (own) properties you get back an empty object.






share|improve this answer














Three dots in an object literal are a spread property, e.g.:



  const a = { b: 1, c: 1 };

  const d = { ...a, e: 1 }; // { b: 1, c: 1, e: 1 }


The last dot with a 0 is a number literal .0 is the same as 0.0. Therefore this:



 { ...(0.0) }


spreads all properties of the number object into the object, however as numbers don't have any (own) properties you get back an empty object.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered 2 days ago









Jonas Wilms

54.8k42749




54.8k42749












  • You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    @mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
    – Jonas Wilms
    2 days ago










  • What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
    – Patrick Roberts
    2 days ago


















  • You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    @mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
    – Jonas Wilms
    2 days ago










  • What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
    – Mist
    2 days ago






  • 3




    Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
    – Patrick Roberts
    2 days ago
















You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
– Mist
2 days ago




You lead me to thinking - I can spread any variable, and own keys will be spread into the new object? It works for Function (function x() {}), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x})// {k: 'v'} but doesn't work for Number (x = 10), (x.k = 'v'), ({...x}) // {}
– Mist
2 days ago




3




3




@mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
– Jonas Wilms
2 days ago




@mist because numbers (and other primitives) get "boxed" into objects when you work with them as objects, and "unboxed" directly afterwards. Therefore x.k will get lost.
– Jonas Wilms
2 days ago












What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
– Mist
2 days ago




What does 'boxed' means exactly? E.g. when I used the dot operator (property) I worked with the number as object. If I am correct, that's just one case. Are there other cases when 'boxing' is happening? Does it apply only to numbers? Is there a perf reason or something? I guess this is for other question, and I should study it further. Could you point me to some book or something?
– Mist
2 days ago




1




1




Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
– Mist
2 days ago




Thanks! I see why my key on number couldn't work. Yayy boxing!
– Mist
2 days ago




3




3




Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
– Patrick Roberts
2 days ago




Numbers don't have any own enumerable properties. But they do have properties.
– Patrick Roberts
2 days ago











1














In a simple terms {...} spread operator in javascript extends one object/array with another.



So, when babelifier tries extending one with another, it has to identify whether it is trying to extend an array or an object.



In the case of array, it iterates over elements.



In the case of object, it iterates over keys.



In this scenario, the babelyfier is trying to extract keys for number by checking the Object's own property call which is missing for number so it returns empty Object.






share|improve this answer



















  • 7




    new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
    – uhoh
    yesterday


















1














In a simple terms {...} spread operator in javascript extends one object/array with another.



So, when babelifier tries extending one with another, it has to identify whether it is trying to extend an array or an object.



In the case of array, it iterates over elements.



In the case of object, it iterates over keys.



In this scenario, the babelyfier is trying to extract keys for number by checking the Object's own property call which is missing for number so it returns empty Object.






share|improve this answer



















  • 7




    new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
    – uhoh
    yesterday
















1












1








1






In a simple terms {...} spread operator in javascript extends one object/array with another.



So, when babelifier tries extending one with another, it has to identify whether it is trying to extend an array or an object.



In the case of array, it iterates over elements.



In the case of object, it iterates over keys.



In this scenario, the babelyfier is trying to extract keys for number by checking the Object's own property call which is missing for number so it returns empty Object.






share|improve this answer














In a simple terms {...} spread operator in javascript extends one object/array with another.



So, when babelifier tries extending one with another, it has to identify whether it is trying to extend an array or an object.



In the case of array, it iterates over elements.



In the case of object, it iterates over keys.



In this scenario, the babelyfier is trying to extract keys for number by checking the Object's own property call which is missing for number so it returns empty Object.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









Rajendra kumar Vankadari

1,087911




1,087911








  • 7




    new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
    – uhoh
    yesterday
















  • 7




    new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
    – uhoh
    yesterday










7




7




new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
– uhoh
yesterday






new word! i.stack.imgur.com/VyYqA.png
– uhoh
yesterday












Mist is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















Mist is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













Mist is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Mist is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53922010%2fwhy-does-0-evaluate-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

"Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box; } 2 total noob sorry any help greatly appreciated. I keep getting this "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'." heres my codes code one CREATE TABLE supplier ( supplierID INT PRIMARY KEY, ISBN INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES book(ISBN), price DECIMAL (5,2), ON UPDATE CASCADE, ON DELETE CASCADE, ); code two CREATE TABLE orders ( orderID INT PRIMARY KEY, customerID INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES customer(customerID), ISBN INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES book(ISBN), orderDate date, ON UPDATE CASCADE, ON DELETE CASCADE, ); Ive run out of stuff to try other than dumbing it down to uselessness. ...
Read more

Alcedinidae

Image
Alcedinidae Martin-pêcheur à dos bleu ( Alcedo azurea ) Classification (COI) Règne Animalia Embranchement Chordata Sous-embr. Vertebrata Classe Aves Ordre Coraciiformes Famille Alcedinidae Rafinesque, 1815 Les Alcédinidés ou Alcedinidae forment une famille d'oiseaux plus connus sous les noms de martins-pêcheurs et martins-chasseurs. Sommaire 1 Description 2 Répartition et habitat 3 Systématique 3.1 Liste alphabétique des genres 3.2 Liste des espèces 4 Chez les Anciens : l'alcyon 4.1 Étymologie (Littré) 4.2 Oiseau « fabuleux » ? 5 Notes 6 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes 7.1 Bibliographie Description | Ce sont des oiseaux compacts de taille petite à moyenne (10 à 46 cm), au bec droit et long, en forme de poignard. Leurs pattes sont courtes, et ils portent un plumage aux couleurs vives. Répartition et habitat | Cosmopolites, ils fréquentent surtout ...
Read more

Origin of the phrase “under your belt”?

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 17 1 Today, I found myself discussing what students should have "under their belts" during a lecture, and I wondered to myself if there was some inappropriate undertone here that I might be unaware of. Question : What is the origin of the phrase "under your belt"? A google search revealed some webpages (e.g. [1]) that assert its origin is related to consumption of food -- once a meal has been eaten, it's under your belt (which is a relief). However, with such websites, I have no way to determine fact from "random guy on the internet making stuff up". etymology idioms ...
Read more