Re: Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator
there were no suggestions. Do you have one?
> On 24 Mar 2016, at 16:36, Björn Larsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Den 2016-03-13 kl. 02:59, skrev Andrea Faulds:
>> Hi Midori,
>>
>> Midori Kocak wrote:
>>> Forgive my rookieness and let me introduce my first RFC here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator
>>> <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator>
>>
>> I think this is a reasonable proposal. I had foreseen that we might add a ??= operator some
>> day when I wrote the original RFC for the ?? operator.
>>
>> I do have one thing to add, though. It's something of a nitpick, but the name ought to
>> be the "null-coalescing assignment operator". This would follow the convention of
>> referring to +=, -= etc. as compound/combined assignment operators[1][2], not "equal"
>> operators (which sounds more like what == and === do, to me) and avoids the mistake
>> ("coalesce" instead of "coalescing") that I originally made in my RFC for ??.[3]
>> I think that RFC naming is important, because the name the author chooses for a feature tends to be
>> the one that ends up in the manual.
>>
>> Anyway, thank you for your RFC!
>>
>> [1] http://php.net/manual/en/language.operators.assignment.php
>> [2] https://github.com/php/php-langspec/blob/master/spec/10-expressions.md#compound-assignment
>> [3] https://blog.ajf.me/2015-12-07-poorly-named-rfcs
>
> Any conclusion on naming of operator, remain or change?
>
> Regards //Björn
>
Thread (12 messages)
- Midori Kocak