Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91928
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
In-Reply-To: <98.2B.15440.39F44F65@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 21:38:40 +0100
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <59659E29-A7EF-40AB-BFF3-4DEE9D682412@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> <98.2B.15440.39F44F65@pb1.pair.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Proposal] Null Coalesce Equal Operator
From: mtkocak@gmail.com (Midori Kocak)

Hi,

I changed the name but I really don=E2=80=99 know how to change the url =
:)

Midori

> On 24 Mar 2016, at 21:35, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> Sara Golemon wrote:
>> 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.
>>=20
>> -Sara
>=20
> The other suggestion was to change "coalesce" to "coalescing", because =
the former is a grammatical error I made when I wrote the original ?? =
RFC, whereas the latter is the correct name.
>=20
> Actually, if we go back to my original email on this subject:
>=20
>>>> Den 2016-03-13 kl. 02:59, skrev Andrea Faulds:
>>>>> 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 +=3D, -=3D etc. as =
compound/combined assignment operators[1][2], not "equal" operators =
(which sounds more like what =3D=3D and =3D=3D=3D 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the mistake ("coalesce" instead of "coalescing") that I originally made =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.
>=20
> I already gave a suggestion for a name there: "null-coalescing =
assignment operator".
>=20
> It's not a big deal, though. :)
>=20
> --=20
> Andrea Faulds
> https://ajf.me/
>=20
> --=20
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20