Convert Boolean to Numeric

[Pachydermitis]

Hi all,
This has got to be easy, but it's got me going bald.
How do I convert a Boolean to a numberic value? This value is going
to a hidden field that is going to an SQL server. There has to be an
elegant way to change true to 1 and false to 0.
Thanks
Pachydermitis

[kaeli]

In article <4f**************************@posting.google.com >,
de******@hotmail.com enlightened us with...

Hi all,
This has got to be easy, but it's got me going bald.
How do I convert a Boolean to a numberic value? This value is going
to a hidden field that is going to an SQL server. There has to be an
elegant way to change true to 1 and false to 0.
Thanks
Pachydermitis

var b = true;
var x= b?1:0;
-------------------------------------------------
~kaeli~
All I ask for is the chance to prove that money
cannot make me happy.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
-------------------------------------------------

[Lee]

kaeli said:

In article <4f**************************@posting.google.com >,
de******@hotmail.com enlightened us with...

Hi all,
This has got to be easy, but it's got me going bald.
How do I convert a Boolean to a numberic value? This value is going
to a hidden field that is going to an SQL server. There has to be an
elegant way to change true to 1 and false to 0.
Thanks
Pachydermitis

var b = true;
var x= b?1:0;

Even simpler:
var x = +b;

The unary plus converts its operand to a number.

[VK]

JavaScript is not Java, its casting syntax is narrowed.
As 'kaeli' said, the simplest is:
myElement.value = (x)?1:0;
And what is not elegant in this?

Pachydermitis <de******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f**************************@posting.google.c om...

Hi all,
This has got to be easy, but it's got me going bald.
How do I convert a Boolean to a numberic value? This value is going
to a hidden field that is going to an SQL server. There has to be an
elegant way to change true to 1 and false to 0.
Thanks
Pachydermitis

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <3f***********************@news.freenet.de>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, VK <sc**********@yahoo.com> posted at Wed, 1
Oct 2003 22:20:59 :-

JavaScript is not Java, its casting syntax is narrowed.
As 'kaeli' said, the simplest is:
myElement.value = (x)?1:0;
And what is not elegant in this?

Pachydermitis <de******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f**************************@posting.google. com...

Hi all,
This has got to be easy, but it's got me going bald.
How do I convert a Boolean to a numberic value? This value is going
to a hidden field that is going to an SQL server. There has to be an
elegant way to change true to 1 and false to 0.

Since +x will do the conversion, your method is tediously long-winded
and untidy. It is certainly not simplest.

Please read the weekly-posted FAQ on the composition of news replies; in
particular on the desirability of trimming quotes and answering after.

Look at the posts in this group; to avoid possible prejudice, omit yours
and mine. You will soon see that the more competent posters use the
form recommended in the FAQ; and, ISTM, that such posters get better
replies, if they need help.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://jibbering.com/faq/> Jim Ley's FAQ for news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> JS maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/JS/&c., FAQ topics, links.

[Emil Mroz]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:02:42 +0100, Dr John Stockton
<sp**@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:

JRS: In article <3f***********************@news.freenet.de>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, VK <sc**********@yahoo.com> posted at Wed, 1
Oct 2003 22:20:59 :-

JavaScript is not Java, its casting syntax is narrowed.
As 'kaeli' said, the simplest is:
myElement.value = (x)?1:0;
And what is not elegant in this?

Since +x will do the conversion, your method is tediously long-winded
and untidy. It is certainly not simplest.

The +x trick might be simpler, but I find that x?1:0 is much easier to
read and comprehend. On the outset, +x looks like some sort of syntax
error. Simpler is not always better when one is writing new code.

I seem to remember reading a quote somewhere about "premature
optimization".

-- Emil