Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7978717
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 4, 20262026-06-04T09:33:47+00:00 2026-06-04T09:33:47+00:00

I came across the following line of code in the underscore.js source: function (obj,

  • 0

I came across the following line of code in the underscore.js source:

function (obj, iterator, context) {
  iterator || (iterator = _.identity);
  ...
}

Is that syntax equivalent to:

if (!iterator) {
  iterator = _.identity;
}

Are there any performance benefits to using the former syntax other than reducing the statement to one line?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-04T09:33:49+00:00Added an answer on June 4, 2026 at 9:33 am

    Yes, it is functionally equivalent to that.

    The only benefit to doing it this way is that your check takes up two less lines.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I was studying an open source code where I came across the following line
I came across the following code that compiles fine (using Visual Studio 2005): SomeObject
I recently came across the following line of code: var type = (typeof x).toLowerCase();
I came across the following line of code : memcmp(mac, (char []){0x01,0x00,0x5E}, 3) Maybe
I recently came across an interesting line of code that waits until a particular
I came across a line of code that i can't seem to grasp Let
Whilst reading through the DirectWrite source code I came across the following struct: ///
I am learning about hash tables and came across the following line of code
I came across following code and don't know what does having from twice mean
I came across the following expression in someone else's code. I think it's terrible

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.