In the book 'Functional javascript' by Michael Fogus, I faced with one expression that I still can't undrestand.
Here is the function:
function defaults(d){
return function(o, k){
var val = fnull(_.identity, d[k]);
return o && val(o[k]);
}
}
where
function fnull(fun /*, defaults*/){
var defaults = _.rest(arguments);
return function(/* args */){
var args = _.map(arguments, function(e, i){
return existy(e)?e : defaults[i];
});
return fun.apply(null, args);
};
};
function existy(x){return x != null}
(underscore is the object of Underscore.js library)
and the example of use:
function doSomething(config){
var lookup = defaults({critical:108});
return lookup(config, 'critical');
}
doSomething({critical: 9});
//=> 9
doSomething({});
//=> 108
I've recreated exapmle in node.js and it works fine, but I wonder why is the logical 'and' in the return line of 'default' function?
return o && val(o[k]);
What is the point of doing that? I checked the exapmle with
return val(o[k]);
and it also worked well.
It's hard to believe that this is just a mistake...
The logical and will make sure the second part is only evaluated if the first part is true. If o does not evaluate to true, the expression returns false. Otherwise, it returns val(o[k]).
This is used as a quick check to see if o is not false / null / undefined.
return o && val(o[k])
mean that if "o" is TRUE it will return "val(o[k])"
given "expr1 && expr2":
Returns expr1 if it can be converted to false; otherwise, returns expr2. Thus, when used with Boolean values, && returns true if both operands are true; otherwise, returns false.
That is smart usage of something called short "short-circuiting" in logical expressions.
As logical expressions are evaluated left to right, they are tested
for possible "short-circuit" evaluation using the following rules:
false && (anything) is short-circuit evaluated to false.
true ||(anything) is short-circuit evaluated to true.
The rules of logic guarantee that these evaluations are always correct. Note that the (anything) part of the above expressions is not evaluated (meaning not ran at all), so any side effects of doing so do not take effect. There are also benefits to it.
Usage:
Make your expressions evaluate faster by putting something easily calculable or likely to be true/fail at leftmost position in expression.
For example parOfExpressionLikelyToBeTrue && (rest of expression) will in most cases not even calculate the other part of expression. Same goes for parOfExpressionLikelyToBeTrue || (rest of espression).
Same can be used if something is very time consuming to calculate, you push it as far back to the right in expression. For example (rest of the expression) && ThisCostsALotOfTime or (rest of the expression) || ThisCostsALotOfTime. Here when first parts of expression short-circuit you save time on your time consuming part.
Short circuit existence evaluation. Lets say you need to check if your object's property pr is 3? What would you do? obj.pr === 3? Yes and no. What if property is missing? It's fine you will get undefined and that is not === 3. But what if object is not there. You will get trying to read pr of undefined error. You can use short-circuit logic here to you benefit by being defensive and writing the expression as if (obj || obj.pr === 3). This ensures there are no errors, only true and false.
Short circuit initialization. Let's say you wanna say variable a is b. But b might be undefined. And you wanna your variable to have a default. You could write a=b and then check if a is undefined and set it to default or you can be clever and write it as a = b || 3. This way a is b or if be is undefined it's 3. Ofc, you can use this for late initialization as well a = a || 3.
Making sure object for function exists before trying to run function. Same as before mentioned with properties you might wanna test if object containing the function exists before running the function. Let's say you got object obj and function fn as it's property. You might call that function like obj.fn(). It's fine, but if obj is undefined you will get an error. Being defensive you might wanna write: obj && obj.fn().
Running the function only if there is one. Since functions in JS can be passed to other functions you can not be sure at run time it's there. Being defensive you might wanna run your function as (typeof passedFunction === "function" && passedFunction() instead just passedFunction() which my produce an error.
other smart things like guardian expressions etc which are complicated and too many to for me to remember all and you should avoid them anyway for better code readability.
I am relatively new to Javascript and am working through ch. 5 of Eloquent Javascript. I came across some code that I don't quite understand. I know HOW it works (the general method and steps), but I don't understand WHY it works.
The code is here:
function filter(array, test) {
var passed = [];
for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
if (test(array[i]))
passed.push(array[i]);
}
return passed;
}
Basically the function takes the element the 'for loop is iterating over' from the array, and compares it to the test parameter.
I am wondering how/why this works:
if (test(array[i]))
There is no || && or other 'comparison operators'. How does it compare values with only using parenthesis?
How is test compared to the array[i] value with no operators?
Link to file: http://eloquentjavascript.net/05_higher_order.html
go to 'Filtering an Array' exercise
Thanks!
Whatever is inside the parentheses of an if statement will be evaluated. If the result is falsy (false, 0, "", NaN, null, undefined) it fails and if the result is truthy (everything else) it passes. So if your if statement contains a function call if (test(something)) {}, then the if statement just says if the result of the function call is truthy then pass.
Also, && and || are not comparison operators, they are boolean operators. They just connect the result of two statements, like true || false which evaluates to true.
I am not quite sure, but I think this is a custom function. Most likely there is some comparison there and the result of the function is True/False. If you give us the whole code we could explain it better to you.
This code is accepting a test parameter that is what is called a "predicate function" i.e. a function that given an element will return true or false.
It's going to be used for example with
var big_numbers = filter(numbers, function(x){ return x > 100; });
i.e. the expected parameter test is actually code.
In Javascript passing code is very common and idiomatic. It's something that is more annoying in other languages that don't support the concept of "closure" and of "nested function", forcing all code to live at the top level, being given a name and to have no context (e.g. the C language).
'test' here is a function, not a value. In Javascript, each function is an object and can be passed as parameter. In this case, test is a function that take one parameter and return true or false base on the parameter value.
So in the for loop, test function is called with each array element and if the result is true, it will be store in another array. Eventually, passed elements would be return to the function caller.
Why is null considered an object in JavaScript?
Is checking
if ( object == null )
Do something
the same as
if ( !object )
Do something
?
And also:
What is the difference between null and undefined?
(name is undefined)
You: What is name? (*)
JavaScript: name? What's a name? I don't know what you're talking about. You haven't ever mentioned any name before. Are you seeing some other scripting language on the (client-)side?
name = null;
You: What is name?
JavaScript: I don't know.
In short; undefined is where no notion of the thing exists; it has no type, and it's never been referenced before in that scope; null is where the thing is known to exist, but it's not known what the value is.
One thing to remember is that null is not, conceptually, the same as false or "" or such, even if they equate after type casting, i.e.
name = false;
You: What is name?
JavaScript: Boolean false.
name = '';
You: What is name?
JavaScript: Empty string
*: name in this context is meant as a variable which has never been defined. It could be any undefined variable, however, name is a property of just about any HTML form element. It goes way, way back and was instituted well before id. It is useful because ids must be unique but names do not have to be.
The difference can be summarized into this snippet:
alert(typeof(null)); // object
alert(typeof(undefined)); // undefined
alert(null !== undefined) //true
alert(null == undefined) //true
Checking
object == null is different to check if ( !object ).
The latter is equal to ! Boolean(object), because the unary ! operator automatically cast the right operand into a Boolean.
Since Boolean(null) equals false then !false === true.
So if your object is not null, but false or 0 or "", the check will pass
because:
alert(Boolean(null)) //false
alert(Boolean(0)) //false
alert(Boolean("")) //false
null is not an object, it is a primitive value. For example, you cannot add properties to it. Sometimes people wrongly assume that it is an object, because typeof null returns "object". But that is actually a bug (that might even be fixed in ECMAScript 6).
The difference between null and undefined is as follows:
undefined: used by JavaScript and means “no value”. Uninitialized variables, missing parameters and unknown variables have that value.
> var noValueYet;
> console.log(noValueYet);
undefined
> function foo(x) { console.log(x) }
> foo()
undefined
> var obj = {};
> console.log(obj.unknownProperty)
undefined
Accessing unknown variables, however, produces an exception:
> unknownVariable
ReferenceError: unknownVariable is not defined
null: used by programmers to indicate “no value”, e.g. as a parameter to a function.
Examining a variable:
console.log(typeof unknownVariable === "undefined"); // true
var foo;
console.log(typeof foo === "undefined"); // true
console.log(foo === undefined); // true
var bar = null;
console.log(bar === null); // true
As a general rule, you should always use === and never == in JavaScript (== performs all kinds of conversions that can produce unexpected results). The check x == null is an edge case, because it works for both null and undefined:
> null == null
true
> undefined == null
true
A common way of checking whether a variable has a value is to convert it to boolean and see whether it is true. That conversion is performed by the if statement and the boolean operator ! (“not”).
function foo(param) {
if (param) {
// ...
}
}
function foo(param) {
if (! param) param = "abc";
}
function foo(param) {
// || returns first operand that can't be converted to false
param = param || "abc";
}
Drawback of this approach: All of the following values evaluate to false, so you have to be careful (e.g., the above checks can’t distinguish between undefined and 0).
undefined, null
Booleans: false
Numbers: +0, -0, NaN
Strings: ""
You can test the conversion to boolean by using Boolean as a function (normally it is a constructor, to be used with new):
> Boolean(null)
false
> Boolean("")
false
> Boolean(3-3)
false
> Boolean({})
true
> Boolean([])
true
What is the difference between null and undefined??
A property when it has no definition is undefined. a null is an object. Its type is object. null is a special value meaning "no value. undefined is not an object, its type is undefined.
You can declare a variable, set it to null, and the behavior is identical except that you'll see "null" printed out versus "undefined". You can even compare a variable that is undefined to null or vice versa, and the condition will be true:
undefined == null
null == undefined
Refer to JavaScript Difference between null and undefined for more detail.
and with your new edit yes
if (object == null) does mean the same if(!object)
when testing if object is false, they both only meet the condition when testing if false, but not when true
Check here: Javascript gotcha
First part of the question:
Why is null considered an object in JavaScript?
It is a JavaScript design error they can't fix now. It should have been type null, not type object, or not have it at all. It necessitates an extra check (sometimes forgotten) when detecting real objects and is source of bugs.
Second part of the question:
Is checking
if (object == null)
Do something
the same as
if (!object)
Do something
The two checks are always both false except for:
object is undefined or null: both true.
object is primitive, and 0, "", or false: first check false, second true.
If the object is not a primitive, but a real Object, like new Number(0), new String(""), or new Boolean(false), then both checks are false.
So if 'object' is interpreted to mean a real Object then both checks are always the same. If primitives are allowed then the checks are different for 0, "", and false.
In cases like object==null, the unobvious results could be a source of bugs. Use of == is not recommended ever, use === instead.
Third part of the question:
And also:
What is the difference between null and undefined?
In JavaScript, one difference is that null is of type object and undefined is of type undefined.
In JavaScript, null==undefined is true, and considered equal if type is ignored. Why they decided that, but 0, "" and false aren't equal, I don't know. It seems to be an arbitrary opinion.
In JavaScript, null===undefined is not true since the type must be the same in ===.
In reality, null and undefined are identical, since they both represent non-existence. So do 0, and "" for that matter too, and maybe the empty containers [] and {}. So many types of the same nothing are a recipe for bugs. One type or none at all is better. I would try to use as few as possible.
'false', 'true', and '!' are another bag of worms that could be simplified, for example, if(!x) and if(x) alone are sufficient, you don't need true and false.
A declared var x is type undefined if no value is given, but it should be the same as if x was never declared at all. Another bug source is an empty nothing container. So it is best to declare and define it together, like var x=1.
People are going round and round in circles trying to figure out all these various types of nothing, but it's all just the same thing in complicated different clothes. The reality is
undefined===undeclared===null===0===""===[]==={}===nothing
And maybe all should throw exceptions.
TLDR
undefined is a primitive value in JavaScript that indicates the implicit absence of a value. Uninitialized variables automatically have this value, and functions without an explicit return statement, return undefined.
null is also a primitive value in JavaScript. It indicates the intentional absence of an object value. null in JavaScript was designed to enable interoperability with Java.
typeof null returns "object" because of a peculiarity in the design of the language, stemming from the demand that JavaScript be interoperable with Java. It does not mean null is an instance of an object. It means: given the tree of primitive types in JavaScript, null is part of the "object-type primitive" subtree. This is explained more fully below.
Details
undefined is a primitive value that represents the implicit absence of a value. Note that undefined was not directly accessible until JavaScript 1.3 in 1998. This tells us that null was intended to be the value used by programmers when explicitly indicating the absence of a value. Uninitialized variables automatically have the value undefined. undefined is a one-of-a-kind type in the ECMAScript specification.
null is a primitive value that represents the intentional absence of an object value. null is also a one-of-a-kind type in the ECMAScript specification.
null in JavaScript was designed with a view to enable interoperability with Java, both from a "look" perspective, and from a programmatic perspective (eg the LiveConnect Java/JS bridge planned for 1996). Both Brendan Eich and others have since expressed distaste at the inclusion of two "absence of value" values, but in 1995 Eich was under orders to "make [JavaScript] look like Java".
Brendan Eich:
If I didn't have "Make it look like Java" as an order from management,
and I had more time (hard to unconfound these two causal factors), then I would have preferred a Self-like "everything's an object"
approach: no Boolean, Number, String wrappers. No undefined and null.
Sigh.
In order to accommodate Java's concept of null which, due to the strongly-typed nature of Java, can only be assigned to variables typed to a reference type (rather primitives), Eich chose to position the special null value at the top of the object prototype chain (i.e. the top of the reference types), and to include the null type as part of the set of "object-type primitives".
The typeof operator was added shortly thereafter in JavaScript 1.1, released on 19th August 1996.
From the V8 blog:
typeof null returns object, and not null, despite null being a
type of its own. To understand why, consider that the set of all
JavaScript types is divided into two groups:
objects (i.e. the Object type)
primitives (i.e. any non-object value)
As such, null means “no object value”, whereas undefined means “no
value”.
Following this line of thought, Brendan Eich designed JavaScript to
make typeof return 'object' for all values on the right-hand side,
i.e. all objects and null values, in the spirit of Java. That’s why
typeof null === 'object' despite the spec having a separate null type.
So Eich designed the hierarchy of primitive types to enable interoperability with Java. This led to him positioning null along with the "object-type primitives" on the hierarchy. To reflect this, when typeof was added to the language shortly thereafter, he chose typeof null to return "object".
The surprise expressed by JavaScript developers at typeof null === "object" is the result of an impedance mismatch (or abstraction leak) between a weakly-typed language (JavaScript) that has both null and undefined, and another, strongly-typed language (Java) that only has null, and in which null is strictly defined to refer to a reference type (not a primitive type).
Note that this is all logical, reasonable and defensible. typeof null === "object" is not a bug, but a second-order effect of having to accommodate Java interoperability.
A number of imperfect backwards rationalisations and/or conventions have emerged, including that undefined indicates implicit absence of a value, and that null indicates intentional absence of a value; or that undefined is the absence of a value, and null is specifically the absence of an object value.
A relevant conversation with Brendan Eich, screenshotted for posterity:
typeof null; // object
typeof undefined; // undefined
The value null represents the intentional absence of any object value. It is one of JavaScript's primitive values and is treated as falsy for boolean operations.
var x = null;
var y;
x is declared & defined as null
y is declared but not defined. It is declared with no value so it is undefined.
z is not declared so would also be undefined if you attempted to use z.
One way to make sense of null and undefined is to understand where each occurs.
Expect a null return value in the following situations:
Methods that query the DOM
console.log(window.document.getElementById("nonExistentElement"));
//Prints: null
JSON responses received from an Ajax request
{
name: "Bob",
address: null
}
RegEx.exec.
New functionality that is in a state of flux. The following returns null:
var proto = Object.getPrototypeOf(Object.getPrototypeOf({}));
// But this returns undefined:
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor({}, "a");
All other cases of non-existence are denoted by undefined (as noted by #Axel). Each of the following prints "undefined":
var uninitalised;
console.log(uninitalised);
var obj = {};
console.log(obj.nonExistent);
function missingParam(missing){
console.log(missing);
}
missingParam();
var arr = [];
console.log(arr.pop());
Of course if you decide to write var unitialised = null; or return null from a method yourself then you have null occurring in other situations. But that should be pretty obvious.
A third case is when you want to access a variable but you don't even know if it has been declared. For that case use typeof to avoid a reference error:
if(typeof unknown !== "undefined"){
//use unknown
}
In summary check for null when you are manipulating the DOM, dealing with Ajax, or using certain ECMAScript 5 features. For all other cases it is safe to check for undefined with strict equality:
if(value === undefined){
// stuff
}
Comparison of many different null checks in JavaScript:
http://jsfiddle.net/aaronhoffman/DdRHB/5/
// Variables to test
var myNull = null;
var myObject = {};
var myStringEmpty = "";
var myStringWhiteSpace = " ";
var myStringHello = "hello";
var myIntZero = 0;
var myIntOne = 1;
var myBoolTrue = true;
var myBoolFalse = false;
var myUndefined;
...trim...
http://aaron-hoffman.blogspot.com/2013/04/javascript-null-checking-undefined-and.html
To add to the answer of What is the differrence between undefined and null, from JavaScript Definitive Guide 6th Edition, p.41 on this page:
You might consider undefined to represent system-level, unexpected,
or error-like absense of value and null to represent program-level,
normal, or expected absence of value. If you need to assign one of
these values to a variable or property or pass one of these values to
a function, null is almost always the right choice.
null and undefined are both false for value equality (null==undefined): they both collapse to boolean false. They are not the same object (null!==undefined).
undefined is a property of the global object ("window" in browsers), but is a primitive type and not an object itself. It's the default value for uninitialized variables and functions ending without a return statement.
null is an instance of Object. null is used for DOM methods that return collection objects to indicate an empty result, which provides a false value without indicating an error.
Some precisions:
null and undefined are two different values. One is representing the absence of a value for a name and the other is representing the absence of a name.
What happens in an if goes as follows for if( o ):
The expression in the parentheses o is evaluated, and then the if kicks in type-coercing the value of the expression in the parentheses - in our case o.
Falsy (that will get coerced to false) values in JavaScript are: '', null, undefined, 0, and false.
The following function shows why and is capable for working out the difference:
function test() {
var myObj = {};
console.log(myObj.myProperty);
myObj.myProperty = null;
console.log(myObj.myProperty);
}
If you call
test();
You're getting
undefined
null
The first console.log(...) tries to get myProperty from myObj while it is not yet defined - so it gets back "undefined". After assigning null to it, the second console.log(...) returns obviously "null" because myProperty exists, but it has the value null assigned to it.
In order to be able to query this difference, JavaScript has null and undefined: While null is - just like in other languages an object, undefined cannot be an object because there is no instance (even not a null instance) available.
For example window.someWeirdProperty is undefined, so
"window.someWeirdProperty === null" evaluates to false while
"window.someWeirdProperty === undefined" evaluates to true.
Moreover checkif if (!o) is not the same as checking if (o == null) for o being false.
In Javascript null is not an object type it is a primitave type.
What is the difference?
Undefined refers to a pointer that has not been set.
Null refers to the null pointer for example something has manually set a variable to be of type null
Look at this:
<script>
function f(a){
alert(typeof(a));
if (a==null) alert('null');
a?alert(true):alert(false);
}
</script>
//return:
<button onclick="f()">nothing</button> //undefined null false
<button onclick="f(null)">null</button> //object null false
<button onclick="f('')">empty</button> //string false
<button onclick="f(0)">zero</button> //number false
<button onclick="f(1)">int</button> //number true
<button onclick="f('x')">str</button> //string true
From "The Principles of Object-Oriented Javascript" by Nicholas C. Zakas
But why an object when the type is null? (In fact, this has been acknowledged as an error by TC39, the committee that designs and maintains JavaScript. You could reason that null is an empty object pointer, making "object" a logical return value, but that’s still confusing.)
Zakas, Nicholas C. (2014-02-07). The Principles of Object-Oriented JavaScript (Kindle Locations 226-227). No Starch Press. Kindle Edition.
That said:
var game = null; //typeof(game) is "object"
game.score = 100;//null is not an object, what the heck!?
game instanceof Object; //false, so it's not an instance but it's type is object
//let's make this primitive variable an object;
game = {};
typeof(game);//it is an object
game instanceof Object; //true, yay!!!
game.score = 100;
Undefined case:
var score; //at this point 'score' is undefined
typeof(score); //'undefined'
var score.player = "felix"; //'undefined' is not an object
score instanceof Object; //false, oh I already knew that.
null is an object. Its type is null. undefined is not an object; its type is undefined.
The best way to think about 'null' is to recall how the similar concept is used in databases, where it indicates that a field contains "no value at all."
Yes, the item's value is known; it is 'defined.' It has been initialized.
The item's value is: "there is no value."
This is a very useful technique for writing programs that are more-easily debugged. An 'undefined' variable might be the result of a bug ... (how would you know?) ... but if the variable contains the value 'null,' you know that "someone, somewhere in this program, set it to 'null.'" Therefore, I suggest that, when you need to get rid of the value of a variable, don't "delete" ... set it to 'null.' The old value will be orphaned and soon will be garbage-collected; the new value is, "there is no value (now)." In both cases, the variable's state is certain: "it obviously, deliberately, got that way."
The other fun thing about null, compared to undefined, is that it can be incremented.
x = undefined
x++
y = null
y++
console.log(x) // NaN
console.log(y) // 0
This is useful for setting default numerical values for counters. How many times have you set a variable to -1 in its declaration?
Undefined means a variable has been declared but it has not been assigned any value while Null can be assigned to a variable representing "no value".(Null is an assignment operator)
2.Undefined is a type itself while Null is an object.
3.Javascript can itself initialize any unassigned variable to undefined but it can never set value of a variable to null. This has to be done programatically.
What is a type?
A type is a way to categorize values. Here is a table with the types in question and their typeof result.
Type
Values type contains
typeof result
Is typeof result a lie?
Undefined
Only: undefined
"undefined"
No
Null
Only: null
"object"
Yes
Object
Infinite amount of values: {}, {a: "b"}, ...
"object"
No
null is not an object, its a value of type Null.
The typeof operator is lying! It returning "object" for null is a mistake in the JavaScript language.
I wrote a chapter about this in my open-source e-book. You can read it here https://github.com/carltheperson/advanced-js-objects
Use null to define something as having no value, use undefined when you expect something might not be defined at all.
For example, if a variable has no value, assign it as null.
var weDontHaveAValue = null;
If you expect that something might be not defined at all, e.g. an optional options argument, use undefined.
if (typeof args.optionalParam !== 'undefined') { }
The main difference between null and undefined is that null represents
a missing object, while undefined represents an uninitialized state of a variable.
You can think of null as an undefined object but undefined will be undefined only
since its type is undefined.
let a;
console.log(a); //undefined, since it is declared but not initialized
console.log(null == undefined) //true
console.log(null === undefined) // false
console.log(typeof null) //object
console.log(typeof undefined) //undefined
Not defined and undefined are not the same thing happening.
age;
You: What is the value of age?
Computer: Okay, let me check my memory/reference table..... at this point (the time of you asking), i do not see any identifier named age, not in this scope/context or any parent scope/context; age is not known to me. Maybe later i will come across an instruction to add that identifier to memory, but it does not exist right now.
var age;
You: What is the value of age;
Computer: Okay, checking my memory... I see an identifier in my reference table with that name age but no value or pointer or anything was assigned to it at the time i added it, so i don't know; you can consider it (age) empty/nothing/useless.
var age = null;
You: What is the value of age;
Computer: Okay, checking my memory... i see age in my reference table: it is null. Basically, it is nothing/empty, you cannot do anything with this value; this was intentional.
Now, i probably should not explain it this way but hopefully it will make sense.
I can see why null was designed to be an object in JS, and i personally like it that way.
null and undefined practically means the same thing: empty/nothing. The difference is in how it is used conceptually.
I look at null as developer-intended nothingness; something being null was done on purpose to represent nothing. I look at undefined as computer-intended nothingness; something not having value by accident of the developer/user.
For example, if you call a function from a library/sdk and got back null, you can almost be sure that was designed on purpose by the developer/author; they specifically wanted to indicate nothingness.
Also see - https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/null
I see this quite a lot at the top of scripts but I'm not completely sure what it means, can anyone explain?
var whatevername = whatevername || {};
It uses the OR operator to set default values. If whatevername has been set it will be used, otherwise a new empty object will be used.
An example:
function sayHi(options){
options = options || {};
if (options.useAlert){
alert("hi");
} else {
console.log("hi");
}
}
In this case you can always use the options parameter, even if it isn't passed to the function:
sayHi();
sayHi({"useAlert": true});
In the first case {} will be used and options.useAlert will be undefined. In the if statement that's the same as it being set to false and console.log will be used to print.
The OR operator is usually used like this:
if (hasAnEmailAddress || hasAPhoneNumber) {contactPerson()}
If hasAnEmailAddress is true the operator will return the value of hasAnEmailAddress instead of hasAPhoneNumber. If it isn't true the value of the second argument, hasAPhoneNumber will be returned.
That logic is used when setting default values: If the first argument is falsy return the second argument - even if it isn't a boolean value.
it initializes whatevername with an empty object if whatevername hasn't already been initialized.
Equivalent code
if(!whatevername) whatevername = {}
In a lot of languages, you will see this done with a ternary operator, which I think makes it very clear what's going on. Example:
var whatevername = (whatevername != NULL) ? whatevername : {};
In Javascript, if the || operator evaluates to truthy, it will not return a boolean value as one might expect, but the value of the operand which was last evaluated. Therefor, if whatevername is null, it will return a new object, otherwise it will return whatevername. Ruby does this as well, just to name another example of this behaviour.
This is a default value statement. || is the symbol for OR, as you probably know.
The statement reads "set whatevername to whatevername OR an empty object". The OR will pick the first of the two objects that reads to a truthy value (not empty, not false). If whatevername was set, you'll get whatevername. If not (or if set to null), you'll get an empty object.