Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Allow specifying undefined as the object for .get() and .has() #58

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 1, 2019
Merged

Allow specifying undefined as the object for .get() and .has() #58

merged 2 commits into from
Nov 1, 2019

Conversation

LinusU
Copy link
Contributor

@LinusU LinusU commented Oct 31, 2019

e.g.

> dotProp.get(undefined, 'a')
undefined

> dotProp.get(undefined, 'a', 'b')
'b'

stevemao
stevemao approved these changes Nov 1, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@stevemao stevemao left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner

Shouldn't we allow undefined for .has() too then?

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Owner

And support for undefined needs to be documented in the readme under get and has.

@LinusU
Copy link
Contributor Author

LinusU commented Nov 1, 2019

@sindresorhus fixed 👌

@sindresorhus sindresorhus changed the title types: Allow sending in undefined as the object Allow specifying undefined as the object for .get() and .has() Nov 1, 2019
@sindresorhus sindresorhus merged commit a6be343 into sindresorhus:master Nov 1, 2019
@LinusU LinusU deleted the patch-2 branch November 11, 2019 14:24
This was referenced Mar 11, 2021
Merged
Open
Open
Merged
Merged
Closed
Open
Closed
Open
Open
Open
@ChronisYan ChronisYan mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2024
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@stevemao stevemao stevemao approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@LinusU @sindresorhus @stevemao