csharplang/proposals/null-coalescing-assignment.md
Fredric Silberberg a9c33ef740
the -> and
2018-07-19 11:06:18 -07:00

78 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown

# null coalescing assignment
* [x] Proposed
* [ ] Prototype: Not Started
* [ ] Implementation: Not Started
* [ ] Specification: Below
## Summary
[summary]: #summary
Simplifies a common coding pattern where a variable is assigned a value if it is null.
As part of this proposal, we will also loosen the type requirements on `??` to allow an expression whose type is an unconstrained type parameter to be used on the left-hand side.
## Motivation
[motivation]: #motivation
It is common to see code of the form
``` c#
if (variable == null)
{
variable = expression;
}
```
This proposal adds a non-overloadable binary operator to the language that performs this function.
There have been at least eight separate community requests for this feature.
## Detailed design
[design]: #detailed-design
We add a new form of assignment operator
``` antlr
assignment_operator
: '??='
;
```
Which follows the [existing semantic rules for compound assignment operators](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/spec/expressions.md#compound-assignment), except that we elide the assignment if the left-hand side is non-null. The rules for this feature are as follows.
Given `a ??= b`, where `A` is the type of `a`, `B` is the type of `b`:
1. If `A` does not exist or is a non-nullable value type, a compile-time error occurs.
2. If `B` is not implicitly convertible to `A`, a compile-time error occurs.
3. The type of `a ??= b` is `A`.
4. `a ??= b` is evaluated at runtime as `a ?? (a = b)`, except that `a` is only evaluated once.
For the relaxation of the type requirements of `??`, we update the spec where it currently states that, given `a ?? b`, where `A` is the type of `a`:
> 1. If A exists and is not a nullable type or a reference type, a compile-time error occurs.
We relax this requirement to:
1. If A exists and is a non-nullable value type, a compile-time error occurs.
## Drawbacks
[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
As with any language feature, we must question whether the additional complexity to the language is repaid in the additional clarity offered to the body of C# programs that would benefit from the feature.
## Alternatives
[alternatives]: #alternatives
The programmer can write `(x = x ?? y)`, `if (x == null) x = y;`, or `x ?? (x = y)` by hand.
## Unresolved questions
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
- [ ] Requires LDM review
- [ ] Should we also support `&&=` and `||=` operators?
## Design meetings
None.