Interesting, I think I misread it too. The one I was thinking of is the
same as the rejected proposal:


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Joe Groff <> wrote:

> > On Jan 25, 2017, at 9:47 AM, Jacob Bandes-Storch <>
> wrote:
> >
> > Really? My observation from a quick test is that "a? = b" assigns b to a
> if a already has a value, or does nothing if it's nil. This is sort of the
> opposite of what's being proposed, which is that "a ?= b" should assign to
> a only if it does NOT have a value.
> My mistake, I misread the proposal. What Nichi appears to be suggesting is
> an assignment that only happens when `b` has a value. I would hesitate to
> spell that `?=` since that's so similar to '? =', but perhaps it's useful,
> though there are many ways to spell that already.
> -Joe
swift-evolution mailing list

Reply via email to