On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 6:28 PM Larry Garfield <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> 1) Please don't top post.
>
Sorry for that!
> 2)
>
> The advantage of ?: over long-ternary is that the part it lets you omit is
> of variable size, and is often verbose (nested array elements). That's not
> the case here, as the omitted portion is a fixed length short constant
> value (": null"). So the value of the abbreviation is much less.
>
Sure, it's not a big deal having to write the ": null" but it doesn't add
any value
>
> I am also not a fan of null being commonly used, as it is a dangerous
> value. More often I would not want null if the color were missing but some
> default color value, which would be represented by something other than
> null anyway. And "falsy" is, as we've been reminded numerous times, a
> dangerous and tricky thing. (I just had several PRs against one of my OSS
> libraries because it relied on falsy, which had all sorts of incorrect
> failure conditions.)
>
Agreed, it was just the first example that came to my mind, probably not
the best one. A better example would creating UUID VO's from string|null
input, there's little room for a default here.
