The Existential Operator
bijumaillist at gmail.com
Thu May 22 22:19:57 PDT 2014
Many times I wish there was Existential Operator, so here is my
comment when we reconsider it in the future...
On 20 May 2014 12:36, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
> WH: What about other contexts such as p?[x], p?.q[x], and p?(x) ? [Note that
> grammar problems arise for some of those.]
p?[x] and p?(x) are confusing with ?: ternary operator
p?.[x] and p?.(x) may be better to avoid that confusion.
More information about the es-discuss