Why bother calling toString?

Related searches

Suppose a variable x has numeric value 0.5.

"cake" + x will return "cake0.5" without complaining. What are the merits of explicitly writing "cake" + x.toString() in the code in Javascript? I expect it's considered better code-style to be explicit. But I'm not very experienced with JS. Is it more performant to write the explicit conversion, rather than allow the compiler to figure it out?

When would there be a reason to omit the explicit conversion?

Maybe it is a habit to convert both operands to the same type, which is mandatory for typed languages.

"cake" + x.toString()

is more precise than to think of using implicit coercion. The reader of the code can have a clear view what is going on.

Java toString() Considerations, It is frustrating to explicitly or implicitly call an object's toString() in a log I agree with all of this, but I believe this is more trouble than most� The toString () method returns the string representation of the object. If you print any object, java compiler internally invokes the toString () method on the object. So overriding the toString () method, returns the desired output, it can be the state of an object etc. depends on your implementation.

Using either method is okay. I've seen engineers write it both ways.

Performance-wise, it's such a negligible difference nobody really will criticize you for using one or the other.

So whichever you prefer, use. It's good to know, however, that both will result in the same outcome...that way when you come across either of them in someone's code, you'll know what it means.

String.valueOf(Object) Vs. Objects.toString(Object), toString(Object) essentially do the same thing: call the toString() method an object's toString() without worry about a NullPointerException if it� When you call the ToString method on a class in the Windows Runtime, it provides the default behavior for classes that don't override ToString. This is part of the support that the .NET Framework provides for the Windows Runtime (see .NET Framework Support for Windows Store Apps and Windows Runtime ).

There's no real reason to use toString() rather than explicity. The speed varies but it's really insignificant (and speed is browser dependant).

Writing toString Methods & Tech Days, System.out.println(mp.getClass().getName() + "@" + Integer.toHexString(mp. hashCode())); // implicitly call toString() on object // as part of string� Every class in java is child of Object class either directly or indirectly. Object class contains toString () method. We can use toString () method to get string representation of an object. Whenever we try to print the Object reference then internally toString () method is invoked.

The main reason to include it is to make your code more explicit. Depending on implicit conversions can make the code harder to understand for the next person who reads it -- even if that's yourself a few weeks later. If I see "cake" + x, my first guess is that x might be something like "pan" or "mix". I wouldn't guess that it's a number.

Automatic Call of toString(), Automatic Call of toString(). It looks like the following will not work: Point a = new Point(); // a is a Point reference System.out.println( a ); | +--- should be String� String toString() static String toString(int i) Parameters. Here is the detail of parameters − i − An int for which string representation would be returned. Return Value. toString() − This returns a String object representing the value of this Integer. toString(int i) − This returns a String object representing the specified integer

In your example you can either use of omit the .toString() method.

Why to use it at all? It depends on your needs. This method allow you to covert numbers from base 2 to base 36:

const myNumber = 32;
myNumber.toString(2);   // Binary - returns 100000
myNumber.toString(8);   // Octal - returns 40
myNumber.toString(10);  // Decimal (default) - returns 32
myNumber.toString(16);  // Hexadecimal - returns 20
myNumber.toString(32);  // Triacontakaidecimal - returns 10

Computed properties do not check for toString method � Issue , JavaScript calls toString when computing object properties. It's bothering me when I'm using https://github.com/acdlite/redux-actions� Why we should override the ToString method in C#. In this article, I am going to discuss why we should override the ToString method in C# with an example and also we will discuss how to override the ToString() method. Please read our previous article before proceeding to this article where we discussed the Properties in C# with some examples

The toString method returns a String representation of an object in Java. By default, the toString method returns the name of the object’s class plus its hash code. Here, you find out how to use the toString method and how to override it in your own classes to create more useful strings. Using toString in Java

Perhaps the object itself has a badly behaved ToString method, but we still want to generate the message, rather than have an unhandled exception. IMO we shouldn't call ToString() at all on a fake, whether it's strict or not. In my solution we call IFakeObject.ToString() instead. For non-fakes, I agree that we should catch the exception.

Description Every object has a toString () method that is automatically called when the object is to be represented as a text value or when an object is referred to in a manner in which a string is expected. By default, the toString () method is inherited by every object descended from Object.

Comments
  • Yeah, it can be a source of bugs too. I always use restrict-plus-operands in Typescript
  • I'd suggest that using toString() is the explicit choice. Skipping it is to depend on an implicit type coercion.