> I'm pretty uncomfortable with this inversion of expectation, Indeed. This inversion sounds confusing and that use case is already possible, just not with a 'shortcut' notation.
> Or maybe we should say the "?+=" operator isn't supported and give an > error since it has no function that also leave open the future use of that notation, if usage and experience point to a 'better' solution If it not an error, there won't be any practical way to change that decision in the future
