.equals(undefined)

[joladev]

If I am on the page "http://local.local" and run URI('http://local.local').equals(undefined) I get true. Comparing a different URL to undefined gives false. As far as I can tell, this only happens if the argument to URI is the current page URL.

I assume this is so that URI() is a shortcut for current URL. This can be differentiated by looking at arguments. Will make a pull request.

Using version 1.14.1.

[rodneyrehm]

that's because .equal() runs the argument through URI(), making the following all do the same thing:

URI(location.href).equals(URI(location.href)) === true;
URI(location.href).equals(URI()) === true;
URI(location.href).equals() === true;

URI().equals(URI(location.href)) === true;
URI().equals(URI()) === true;
URI().equals() === true;

I don't consider this a bug. Maybe the documentation could be more clear about it…

[joladev]

While all of those make sense

URI(undefined).equals(URI()) === true

doesn't really. It is very easy to make mistakes by inputting something you think is a value (but is really undefined) to URI. This is not a logical behavior. A possible solution would be adding

if (arguments.length === 1) {
  throw new TypeError('undefined is not a valid argument for URI');
}

to line 43. But obviously it is your call!

[rodneyrehm]

(I took the liberty of fixing your code examples and make line 43 be 100x more useful by linking it to the mentioned line…)

The constructor takes 2 arguments, so you'd likely check if (arguments.length) instead, agree?
PR welcome, don't forget the tests :)

But obviously it is your call!

Actually it's the community's, as your suggested change introduces a (tiny) backward compatibility break (which I assume most people wouldn't run into):

// currently equivalent
URI(undefined);
URI(location.href);

But I guess that's fine, considering that you suggested throwing an error instead of silently using the empty string.

[rodneyrehm]

@eakron do you want to send a PR to fix this issue?

[joladev]

Pull request: #196