Passing primitive variables by reference in JavaScript

[nick]

Nothing.  You miss the point.

No. You missed the point. More like avoided it, in fact.

A burning match supports that you hold it right below your hand.

You missed the point. A few lines of example code demonstrating a
basic programming concept is not a demonstration of a pattern.

[...]
But if you are arguing a matter of programming taste,

I am not.  I have made my argument, now you only need to recognize it.

perhaps your tone should be somewhat less peremptory.

Perhaps you should talk less and read more.

Perhaps you should talk less toss some *JavaScript* code in a console
somewhere to see what it actually does before you make all kinds of
assumptions based on things you read. I don't care who you are, half
of what you said in this thread was downright incorrect, not useful,
negative, and generally unappealing. Pretty much the only useful
things you have contributed were pointed out by Garrett in like 2
lines of text (thanks Garrett).

In fact I'll reiterate them here; the main problems with this are (1)
Object.prototype is off-limits due to 'in' and (2) nobody likes $ in
the identifier. Thanks for pointing out some of the minor details in
your original post, I guess, but really your tone is quite rude.

Also, you missed the point.

PointedEars
--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tm Berners-Lee

.. <----- The point

----------------------------------------------> D:< You

-- Nick