+1 Il 24 nov 2016 1:30 AM, "Daniel Sun" <realblue...@hotmail.com> ha scritto:
> I like the nickname "Elvis assignment" for ?= > > Cheers, > Daniel.Sun > > > > 在 2016年11月24日 04:18，"Guillaume Laforge [via Groovy]" <ml-node+[hidden > email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736970&i=0>>写道：<br > type="att > Sounds about right. > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Shil Sinha <[hidden email] > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=0>> wrote: > >> Elvis assignment? >> >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:47 PM Andres Almiray <[hidden email] >> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=1>> wrote: >> >>> Long live pompaduor walrus ... >>> >>> What would be an appropriate nickname for ?=, I wonder. >>> >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast >>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray >>> -- >>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator. >>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, >>> and those who don't. >>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion. >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Paul King <[hidden email] >>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=2>> wrote: >>> >>> For all our other operators of the form: >>> >>> a X= b >>> >>> it is shorthand for: >>> >>> a = a X b >>> >>> So, to follow that convention the operator is: >>> >>> a ?:= b >>> >>> which as per previous discussions is a bit cumbersome, so I am +1 for >>> the shortened form so long as we document appropriately. >>> >>> Paul. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Gerald Wiltse <[hidden email] >>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=3>> wrote: >>> > +1 >>> > >>> > Gerald R. Wiltse >>> > [hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=4> >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Winnebeck, Jason >>> > <[hidden email] >>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=5>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> At first I was going to vote 0, because I feel like a = a ?: b is >>> clear >>> >> (and I compare it to a = a || b from JS). However, looking at the dev >>> list, >>> >> I definitely see a nice case for it: >>> >> >>> >> person.name.last = person.name.last ?: "unknown" >>> >> >>> >> When you have a non-trivial assignment expression, I see the benefit: >>> >> >>> >> person.name.last ?= "unknown" >>> >> >>> >> However, I feel like it is not intuitive or clear. But, I don't think >>> the >>> >> operator hurts, and it's certainly not any less intuitive than <=> for >>> >> example or even ?: when seen for the very first time. It's an easy >>> look up >>> >> in Groovy docs, and if you don't know it and don't use it, it's not a >>> huge >>> >> loss. So it doesn't hurt to add it, and while not instantly readable, >>> it's a >>> >> trivial docs lookup when someone is reading the code. >>> >> >>> >> So, I vote +1. But, honestly, I don't see myself using it very often >>> as >>> >> I'd normally use Elvis at time of initial assignment. I wouldn't put >>> it very >>> >> high on a prioritized backlog of things to improve for Groovy. >>> >> >>> >> Jason >>> >> >>> >> -----Original Message----- >>> >> From: Daniel Sun [mailto:[hidden email] >>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=6>] >>> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:59 AM >>> >> To: [hidden email] >>> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5736959&i=7> >>> >> Subject: [VOTE] new operator ?= >>> >> >>> >> Hi all, >>> >> >>> >> If the new operator ?= (e.g. a ?= 'foo' is equivalent of a = >>> a ?: >>> >> 'foo') were to be added to Groovy programming language, do you like >>> it? >>> >> (Yes: +1; No: -1; Not bad: 0) >>> >> >>> >> Cheers, >>> >> Daniel.Sun >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> View this message in context: >>> >> http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-new-operator-tp5736931.html >>> >> Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >>> >> This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the >>> >> intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or >>> >> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, >>> please >>> >> contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the >>> original >>> >> message and any attachments. >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Guillaume Laforge > Apache Groovy committer & PMC Vice-President > Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud Platform > > Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/ > Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+ > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts> > > > ------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-new-operator- > tp5736931p5736959.html > To unsubscribe from [VOTE] new operator ?=, click here. > NAML > <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> > > ------------------------------ > View this message in context: Re: [VOTE] new operator ?= > <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-new-operator-tp5736931p5736970.html> > Sent from the Groovy Users mailing list archive > <http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Users-f329450.html> at > Nabble.com. >
