Another place JS would create a consideration is NaN. You might want that to
play well with the operator. Possibly you could consider ?? for a wider range
of nullish values and ??? for ONLY undefined.
x = parseInt ("a") ?? 42
x = a.nada ??? 42
📱 Michael McGlothlin
> On Aug 16, 2015, at 10:32 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> A link to a wikipedia article is not *actually* a proposal : )
>
> As Michael points out, you need to at least provide some consideration for
> null vs. undefined. I would also like to see some thought given to how such
> an operator might interact with a null propagation operator, discussed here:
>
> https://esdiscuss.org/topic/existential-operator-null-propagation-operator
>
> (Link appears to be temporarily not working...)
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
