Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91902
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain telia.com from 81.236.60.155 cause and error)
To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>, Midori Kocak <mtkocak@gmail.com>
References: <CD067B03-8DE2-42E4-9DA3-34C8B3D0B3D2@gmail.com>
 <E3.2B.14237.979C4E65@pb1.pair.com> <56F40965.30302@telia.com>
 <3A78AC53-5235-4CFE-9F0D-21F5837B6025@gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVpTCgpqCSKT3Q5Mojxq=0f7WhsfB9Zs9M62nAxyU9V=Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <56F40CF0.3000206@telia.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 16:51:12 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAESVnVpTCgpqCSKT3Q5Mojxq=0f7WhsfB9Zs9M62nAxyU9V=Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator
From: bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Bj=c3=b6rn_Larsson?=)

Couldn't agree more :)

//Björn

Den 2016-03-24 kl. 16:49, skrev Sara Golemon:
> Changing "equal" to "assignment" seems to have been the suggestion.
> I've taken that into the short-ternary version.  And as a minor edit
> (not worth closing/reopening vote) would recommend the same for null
> coallesce.
>
> -Sara
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Midori Kocak <mtkocak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> there were no suggestions. Do you have one?
>>
>>> On 24 Mar 2016, at 16:36, Björn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com> 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
>>>
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>