> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Richardson [mailto:simples...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 08 April 2011 08:02


> 
> Indeed.
> 
> The '?' character already is special, so using '??' seems like a
> safe,
> practical approach. However, I'd prefer maintaining the form of the
> standard
> ternary operator with the colon ($value = $var['bar'] ?? : 'Bar was
> not
> set'; // value ="Bar was not) so the '??' operator could be applied
> in any
> situation that one would normally use the standard ternary operator.
> 
> // standard
> $value = isset($a[$key]) ? $a[$key] : 'Not set';
> 
> // new ?? double ternary that performs isset check and omits second
> expression
> $value = $a[$key] ?? : 'Not set';
> 
> // new ?? double ternary that performs isset check and uses second
> expression
> $value = $a[$key] ?? strtoupper($a[$key]) : 'Not set';
> 

Like it! I would have proposed ??: for the isset() variant of ?:,
and I think decomposing it into a full ternary operator in this way,
with ??: as a degenerate variant, is brilliant.

(Only downside is, people would have to stop referring to *the*
ternary operator!)


Cheers!

Mike

 -- 
Mike Ford,
Electronic Information Developer, Libraries and Learning Innovation,  
Leeds Metropolitan University, C507 City Campus, 
Woodhouse Lane, LEEDS,  LS1 3HE,  United Kingdom 
Email: m.f...@leedsmet.ac.uk 
Tel: +44 113 812 4730



To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to 
http://disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to