From: shevegen@... Date: 2016-04-09T05:33:50+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:74859] [Ruby trunk Feature#12263] Feature request: &&. operator (shorthand for foo && foo.method) Issue #12263 has been updated by Robert A. Heiler. I don't really like it. matz said that & is the lonely operator because the person is staring at a dot before, like &. &&. would be too lonely because now you have 2 people staring at a dot together. This would make ruby hackers too sad. In general I do not like the amplification of some tokens; for instance, @foo is much nicer than @@foo. I am also sure that, if you add this, people will suggest $$ as well. :) I also have to admit that I find "x && y" easier to understand than "x&&.y". ---------------------------------------- Feature #12263: Feature request: &&. operator (shorthand for foo && foo.method) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12263#change-57987 * Author: Johnny Shields * Status: Feedback * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- Ruby 2.3 introduced the `&.` safe-navigation operator. I'd like to propose a `&&.` operator which would be shorthand for: ~~~ruby foo && foo.method ~~~ Unlike `&.`, this does not continue the chain if the variable evaluates to `false`. This would give the following result: ~~~ruby false&.class # => FalseClass false&&.class # => false false&.inexisting # => raises NoMethodError false&&.inexisting # => false ~~~ -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: