For what it's worth, doubling down on a design that exposes such poor choices wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing ;)
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 at 02:56, kai zhu <kaizhu...@gmail.com> wrote: > this proposal is not as useful as you would think. when integrating > with api's and modules not written by yourself, you will always be > self-doubting whether the "other" guy who wrote their code used > null/undefined/false/0/<empty string> values, causing you to avoid > using this feature in general. > > the <empty string> is commonly treated as a defacto null when reading > dom-element attributes or when fetching web-data > > > On 8/15/17, Claude Pache <claude.pa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This feature is more related to null coalescing (evaluate the RHS when > the > > LHS is null) than to optional chaining (evaluate the LHS when the LHS is > > *not* null). > > > > See https://github.com/gisenberg/proposal-nullary-coalescing/issues/1 > > <https://github.com/gisenberg/proposal-nullary-coalescing/issues/1> > > > > —Claude > > > >> Le 15 août 2017 à 03:11, Ari Porad <a...@ariporad.com> a écrit : > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> Given that optional chaining is now stage–1, would there be interest in > >> reviving this proposal? (This idea originated from my comment here > >> < > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-optional-chaining/issues/18#issuecomment-322329156 > >.) > >> > >> Apologies if this isn’t the proper way to suggest this idea, it’s my > first > >> time posting on es-discuss! > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> es-discuss mailing list > >> es-discuss@mozilla.org <mailto:es-discuss@mozilla.org> > >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >> <https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
