New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

What happened to the default operator and existential operator strawmans? #359

Closed
flying-sheep opened this Issue Feb 4, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@flying-sheep

flying-sheep commented Feb 4, 2016

seen here and here, those are features many people switching from coffeescript are missing.

@zenparsing

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@zenparsing

zenparsing Feb 4, 2016

Contributor

@flying-sheep es-discuss is the appropriate place for these kinds of questions. See https://esdiscuss.org/topic/optional-chaining-aka-existential-operator-null-propagation for a recent proposal.

Contributor

zenparsing commented Feb 4, 2016

@flying-sheep es-discuss is the appropriate place for these kinds of questions. See https://esdiscuss.org/topic/optional-chaining-aka-existential-operator-null-propagation for a recent proposal.

@flying-sheep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@flying-sheep

flying-sheep Feb 4, 2016

ah, OK, so @claudepache will champion es-optional-chaining soon anyway

flying-sheep commented Feb 4, 2016

ah, OK, so @claudepache will champion es-optional-chaining soon anyway

@claudepache

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@claudepache

claudepache Feb 4, 2016

Contributor

ah, OK, so @claudepache will champion es-optional-chaining soon anyway

Rather, I'm waiting for someone from TC39 to champion it.

Contributor

claudepache commented Feb 4, 2016

ah, OK, so @claudepache will champion es-optional-chaining soon anyway

Rather, I'm waiting for someone from TC39 to champion it.

@flying-sheep

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@flying-sheep

flying-sheep Feb 4, 2016

oh, then i didn’t read properly. in any case, this is an important proposal.

I’d also like to see x ?= y, but understand that this would be a different proposal

flying-sheep commented Feb 4, 2016

oh, then i didn’t read properly. in any case, this is an important proposal.

I’d also like to see x ?= y, but understand that this would be a different proposal

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment