But Elvis operator users won't relate to ||=, whereas they see the analogy between ?: and ?=. It's still Elvis "?:-)"
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Sergei Egorov <bsid...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for ||= > > Very convenient operator, doesn't break readability (more or less) > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 4:25 PM Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> It's a feature that's often be requested. >> I think Ruby's got an equivalent with ||=, and it's often the reference >> people give when exploring our Elvis operator coming from a ruby background >> in particular. >> I've had several opportunities where I could've used this operator. >> It might make for a nice addition. >> >> Guillaume >> >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Daniel Sun <realblue...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Marcin Erdmann proposed the new operator ?=, e.g. a ?= "foo" is >> equivalent of a = a ?: "foo". >> >> I like his idea, what do you think about it? >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel.Sun >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://groovy.329449.n5. >> nabble.com/PROPOSAL-new-operator-tp5736886.html >> Sent from the Groovy Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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> >> > -- 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>
