Re: [RFC] anti-coalescing-operator

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mark Randall <marandall@php.net> wrote: > On 24/10/2019 22:52, Ken Stanley wrote: > > I'm more interested in having a negation operator for the null-coalescing > > operator, especially since cognatively it should be easy to discern what > it > > does. > > At the point your syntax ends up looking like you're screaming at your > source code, I think easy cognition has likely gone out the window. > > There are plenty of much more expressive ways of doing this without > introducing new syntax IMHO. Mark, Yes, the operator would be new as in it doesn’t exist, but it’s not new in the fact that it is simply a negation of an existing operator. I would be keen to see the more expressive techniques that retain the succinctness of having a not-null coalescing operator. I can certainly appreciate the hesitation to introduce more syntax. However, I am arguing that this particular case is merely an extension (compliment) of the existing null-coalescing operator and therefore it’s not truly new; especially since !== null is a very common comparison used in programming. > > Mark Randall > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Thank you. > |> is not something new it appeared in many languages long > time ago (in some forms). JavaScript also has a proposal of it. And PHP someone has already proposed one. > https://github.com/tc39/proposal-pipeline-operator > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator Kosit, Thank you. In this case I’d still argue that my proposed operator, for what I’m intending it to be, is the better solution. I appreciate that my example might not have been the best, but I wanted to demonstrate one possible usage out of many that could be used to easily solve the same problem of needing to do “something” based on a non-null value. Thank you! -- "Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light." — Dylan Thomas