Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 25, 2022. It is now read-only.

Commit

Permalink
Closing discussions about alternative syntaxes
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Closes #5. Closes #34. Closes #51. Closes #52. Closes #61.
Thanks for participating.
  • Loading branch information
claudepache authored Jun 9, 2019
1 parent 586e892 commit b7529f2
Showing 1 changed file with 6 additions and 1 deletion.
7 changes: 6 additions & 1 deletion README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -195,7 +195,12 @@ Alternative syntaxes for those two cases each have their own flaws; and deciding
As for <language X>, it has different syntactical constraints than JavaScript because of <some construct not supported by X or working differently in X>.
<dt>Ok, but I <b>really</b> think that <i>&lt;alternative syntax></i> is better
<dd>
Various alternative syntaxes has been explored and extensively discussed in the past. None of them gained consensus. Search for [issues
with label “alternative syntax”](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-optional-chaining/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=label%3A%22alternative+syntax%22).
<dt>Why does (null)?.b evaluate to undefined rather than null?
Expand Down

0 comments on commit b7529f2

Please sign in to comment.