Timeline for answer to Convert character to ASCII code in JavaScript by Jim
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2023 at 9:07 | history | edited | Flimm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Include caveats about Unicode
|
| Dec 15, 2020 at 11:25 | comment | added | Laurent Payot |
charCodeAt() without argument gives an error in TypeScript.
|
|
| Jun 27, 2019 at 20:54 | comment | added | Taugenichts | including 0 is now slower on Chrome 75 by 2% for anyone interested... interestingly, the .charCodeAt(1) was the most performant (.03% faster than no args) | |
| Feb 4, 2019 at 6:58 | comment | added | Mahesh Jamdade | please don't just give the solution explain why it would work with a supportive answer | |
| Mar 8, 2017 at 15:18 | comment | added | Andrew | Apparently omitting the 0 is slower, if anyone cares. See royhowie's comment on Marco Altieri's answer below. | |
| Feb 6, 2017 at 12:11 | history | rollback | Jim |
Rollback to Revision 5
|
|
| S Feb 6, 2017 at 3:49 | history | suggested | abhisekp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Add es6 codePointAt method
|
| Feb 6, 2017 at 2:38 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 6, 2017 at 3:49 | |||||
| Apr 1, 2016 at 13:56 | comment | added | KingRider |
@developerbmw Try "ABC".charCodeAt(0) // return 65 is just A ... position array, other position B is "ABC".charCodeAt(1) // return 66, i agre @Mathias is correct.
|
|
| Mar 11, 2016 at 5:01 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Mar 11, 2016 at 5:59 | |||||
| Jan 14, 2016 at 23:09 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Jan 15, 2016 at 0:08 | |||||
| May 28, 2015 at 21:40 | comment | added | brettwhiteman |
@MathiasBynens charCodeAt() with no arguments makes little sense
|
|
| Jun 18, 2014 at 12:05 | comment | added | Lior | I think it's a bit clearer (readability wise) to specify the index instead of leaving it to defaults...but it's minor anyway | |
| May 9, 2014 at 20:55 | comment | added | Qix - MONICA WAS MISTREATED | @wademontague I would have never thought to perf-test that. That's so ridiculous! Thanks for the results. | |
| May 9, 2013 at 12:35 | comment | added | wade montague | @Mathias Bynens, It certainly does default to zero but I just ran a just out of interest test on performance and it performs **relatively badly compared using 0. jsperf.com/default-to-0-vs-0/4 ** Its a relative difference only, either way its very very quick. | |
| Jan 4, 2013 at 22:24 | history | rollback | Jim |
Rollback to Revision 3
|
|
| Jan 4, 2013 at 19:51 | history | edited | jcollum | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 50 characters in body
|
| Nov 9, 2012 at 17:14 | history | rollback | Jim |
Rollback to Revision 1
|
|
| Nov 6, 2012 at 4:29 | history | edited | Starx | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Removed unnecessary indexing
|
| Sep 12, 2012 at 19:09 | comment | added | bobobobo |
You should point out that unlike String.fromCharCode( asciiNumVal ), stringInstance.charCodeAt( index ) is not a static method of class String
|
|
| Nov 15, 2011 at 19:46 | comment | added | tokland | @MathiasBynens: and fortunately this is documented: developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/…. "if it is not a number, it defaults to 0" | |
| Oct 17, 2011 at 9:40 | comment | added | Mathias Bynens |
Fun fact: you don’t really need the 0 (first argument value) — just "\n".charCodeAt() will do.
|
|
| May 1, 2011 at 9:38 | comment | added | viam0Zah |
The opposite of this is String.fromCharCode(10).
|
|
| Feb 25, 2011 at 12:18 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 25, 2011 at 12:19 | |||||
| Sep 18, 2008 at 16:15 | vote | accept | levik | ||
| Sep 18, 2008 at 16:15 | history | answered | Jim | CC BY-SA 2.5 |