https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21019902/why-cant-javasc...

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

  [min, num, max].sort((a, b) => Math.sign(a - b))[1]

  switch (true) {
  case num > max: return max;
  case num < min: return min;
  default: return num;
  }

    .sort((a, b) => a - b)

Only by defining a `const subtract = (a, b) => a - b;`, which isn't really point-free.

Or by using a different language.

[ROT 13] spoiler: cnefrVag frpbaq nethzrag vf onfr, znc frpbaq nethzrag vf vaqrk va neenl. 10 vf gur frpbaq nethzrag, vaqrk 1. cnefrVag(10, 1) unf vyyrtny onfr

[0] https://rot13.com/

I really love this! I’m not sure whether to laugh, cry, or applaud, but I love how it makes me feel all those emotions at the same time.

    [10, 2, 100].sort()[1] //returns 100

  function clamp(n, min, max) {
      return [min, n, max].sort((a, b) => a - b)[1];
  }
  
  for (var i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
      clamp(Math.random() | 0, Math.random() | 0, Math.random() | 0);
  }

  Compilation clamp#CChm91-1-Baseline:
        arg0: predicting OtherObj
        arg1: predicting BoolInt32
        arg2: predicting BoolInt32
        arg3: predicting BoolInt32
          [   0] enter              
          [   1] get_scope          loc4
          [   3] mov                loc5, loc4
          [   6] check_traps        
          [   7] mov                loc11, arg2
          [  10] mov                loc12, arg1
          [  13] mov                loc13, arg3
          [  16] new_array          loc10, loc11, 3, 3
          [  22] get_by_id          loc7, loc10, 0
          [  27] new_func_exp       loc9, loc4, 0
          [  31] call               loc7, loc7, 2, 16
          [  37] get_by_val         loc6, loc7, Int32: 1(const0)
          [  42] ret                loc6

  Compilation clamp#CChm91-2-DFG:
        arg0: predicting OtherObj
        arg1: predicting BoolInt32
        arg2: predicting BoolInt32
        arg3: predicting BoolInt32
          [   0] enter              
          [   1] get_scope          loc4
          [   3] mov                loc5, loc4
          [   6] check_traps        
          [   7] mov                loc11, arg2
          [  10] mov                loc12, arg1
          [  13] mov                loc13, arg3
          [  16] new_array          loc10, loc11, 3, 3
          [  22] get_by_id          loc7, loc10, 0
          [  27] new_func_exp       loc9, loc4, 0
          [  31] call               loc7, loc7, 2, 16
          [  37] get_by_val         loc6, loc7, Int32: 1(const0)
          [  42] ret                loc6

(Shots fired)

The array implementation sidesteps this by not semantically defining a max and min, instead sorting three arbitrary numbers.

If that is the version of clamp you need, the sort based solution reveals something profound and unexpected: it’s not just the two end points of the range that are equivalent, but all three numbers. Keeping value A between B and C is the same as keeping B between A and C or C between A and B. It’s completely arbitrary which pair you consider to be a range.

If I wanted it to automatically flip the values to ensure a sensible range is defined, I would probably use "a" and "b" or "endpoint1" and "endpoint2" or something, because "max" has now become "max or min," which is not the same.

I still found your approach interesting and it's rare there's a perfect approach so don't take it to heart.