No, it wouldn't - see https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/1069.
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 11:54 AM Bob Myers <r...@gol.com> wrote: > Wouldn't simply making array spreading ignore nullish values be backward > compatible? > Unless one imagines that people are depending on this being an error > somehow. > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 10:05 AM Jordan Harband <ljh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Since object spread already ignores nullish values, a syntax change would >> only be needed for array spread. Then, the two kinds of spread would >> support different syntactic features, which seems inconsistent. >> >> On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 7:56 AM Beknar Askarov <beknaraska...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thank you, everyone, for feedback. Sorry for not getting back for a >>> while. I had some time to think and concluded that nullish noop in >>> spreading is a good feature to be added to the language without >>> complicating it too much. >>> So please take a look at the explainer >>> <https://gist.github.com/askbeka/8bb17508ec250a789ea9bff683a50e38> and >>> lets discuss in es-discourse proposal >>> <https://es.discourse.group/t/optional-spreading-proposal/224>, if you >>> have further feedback, please share >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 7:18 PM Herby Vojčík <he...@mailbox.sk> wrote: >>> >>>> On 23. 8. 2019 16:24, Beknar Askarov wrote: >>>> > @Scott Rudiger After thinking more about it. >>>> > I would not like to conflict with semantics of optional chaining and >>>> > null coalescing operator. >>>> > So in order to not confuse people, maybe introduce two types of >>>> optional >>>> > spread operators >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > 1. `?...` - Do not spread if nullish. Note nullish. Else try to >>>> spread. >>>> > Signature Array: [?...(nullish | Iterable)]; >>>> > Signature Object: {?...(nullish | object)}; >>>> > >>>> > 2. `!...` - Do not spread if false. Note FALSE not falsy. Else try to >>>> > spread. >>>> >>>> I read >>>> >>>> !...foo >>>> >>>> as >>>> >>>> !(...foo) >>>> >>>> that is, logical not. I'd tip it already works that way. In which case >>>> no go, break compat. >>>> >>>> Herby >>>> >>>> > Signature Array: [!...(false | Iterable)]; >>>> > Signature Object: {!...(false | object)}; >>>> > >>>> > I think this can be an option to avoid consfusion >>>> >>>> Or add a new one. :-( >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> 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
