Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upWhat happened to the default operator and existential operator strawmans? #359
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
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.
|
@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. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
flying-sheep
commented
Feb 4, 2016
|
ah, OK, so @claudepache will champion es-optional-chaining soon anyway |
flying-sheep
closed this
Feb 4, 2016
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
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.
Rather, I'm waiting for someone from TC39 to champion it. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
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 |
flying-sheep commentedFeb 4, 2016
seen here and here, those are features many people switching from coffeescript are missing.