Issue #11537 has been updated by Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas.


Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> But behavior of `&.` should be kept, i.e. it should skip `nil` but recognize `false`.

I'm not sure I understood exactly what you meant by this.

Did you mean .? and &. would be implemented in the same way?

For example: false.?inexistent will raise. Should false&.inexisting raise or return false?

I'd like to see it always raising no matter you decide for ".?" or "&.". I don't see any reasons why one would like to call a method conditionally in the false object. If this happens it's must likely to be a bug from the method returning false.

----------------------------------------
Feature #11537: Introduce "Safe navigation operator"
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11537#change-54743

* Author: Hiroshi SHIBATA
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
----------------------------------------
I sometimes write following code with rails application:

```ruby
u = User.find(id)
if u && u.profile && u.profile.thumbnails && u.profiles.thumbnails.large
  ...
```

or

```ruby
# Use ActiveSupport
if u.try!(:profile).try!(:thumbnails).try!(:large)
 ...
```
I hope to write shortly above code. Groovy has above operator named "Safe navigation operator" with "`?.`" syntax.
Ruby can't use "`?.`" operator.

Can we use "`.?`" syntax. like this:

```ruby
u = User.find(id)
u.?profile.?thumbnails.?large
```

Matz. How do you think about this?




-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/