Hi Ken,
This is definitely an interesting idea, and when described as "the
opposite of ??" the !?? syntax makes sense.
Looking at the example, though, the "negating" part becomes a bit confusing.
The verbose form reads naturally as a positive assertion - "if this is
set, do this":
if (isset($_SERVER['fname']) {
$user->setName($_SERVER['fname']);
}
If we used the ?? operator, it would be a negative, "if this is not set,
do this":
$_SERVER['fname'] ?? $user->unsetName();
So the short-hand form becomes a kind of double negative - "if this is
not set, don't do this", or "if this is not not set, do this":
$_SERVER['fname'] !?? $user->setName($_SERVER['fname']);
That makes me think that the choice of syntax isn't quite right, but I'm
not sure what to suggest instead.
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins (né Collins)
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
