On 3/25/2025 4:11 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
Writing coalesce($foo, 0) or ($foo ?? 0) is a small cost when writing the code
to save cost every time anyone reads it.
I see, part of the concern is just avoiding implicit type coercion.
Yes, that would be an understandable reason to requir
wrong choice.
I don't know if I'd go as far as banning a single-argument coalesce, but I
would definitely discourage its use.
The feedback and the thoughtful perspective on user mistakes are
helpful. Thank you again.
-
Robert Chapin
On 3/23/2025 11:10 AM, Larry Garfield wrote:
I'm not sure it justifies a new pseudo-function language construct.
Fair enough. Thank you for the feedback.
On 3/23/2025 2:37 PM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
It's telling that all your examples with ?? put a value other than
null on the right-ha
($var ??
null) with mandatory extra parentheses. A functional expression could
make this less prone to mistakes. It would also avoid concerns with
alternatives such as unary operators.
Any feedback on this idea would be appreciated.
-
Robert Chapin
Nz. What we can do with an expression like
nullc($test) === 'on' should be compatible with other existing operators
and is more elegant than operators-in-parentheses or any multi-line
statements. This would also resolve the problem of not being able to do
the same in a user function.
Further reading:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/unary_null_coalescing_operator
-
Robert Chapin
