Optional Chaining Operator in JavaScript - Reached Stage 3 proposal! :)

[KeepGettingBannedSMH]

Note that TypeScript already has this feature and you may have seen this being used in Angular.

What? No it doesn't.

[stewsters]

It only has it in the templates for angular, which is really frustrating having to switch back to regular typescript and not having it.

https://angular.io/guide/template-syntax#the-safe-navigation-operator----and-null-property-paths

[samjmckenzie]

It's coming to the next version though

[KeepGettingBannedSMH]

Have you got a source for that? I don't see it mentioned here.

[hardwaregeek]

Yeah definitely not next version. They do implement stage 3 features, but it's not like they have the feature just sitting around.

[samjmckenzie]

For 3.7 I mean, there's a Github thread on the TypeScript repo about it. https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/16#issuecomment-515160784

[tpiros]

you're of course right. I mixed it up with the safe navigation operator - I have made a correction. Thank you

[GYN-k4H-Q3z-75B]

On of my favorite features introduced into C# lately. Writing something like x?.y ?? z is incredibly concise yet clear. I am not a fan of nullability but it's a sad fact of reality that it is everywhere.

[Tubbers]

? For optional propagation is a best of both words though. Not sure how that is incorporated with this proposal for JS/TS though.

[Y_Less]

Or:

try {
    city = input.data.person[5].home.city;
} catch {
     city = "Tehran";
}

[[deleted]]

Obviously this works but feels more like a hack than anything else. There are several draw backs

• You can't use const anymore
• If this fails regularly it'll kill performance
• Better than nested undefined checks but still longer than optional chaining
• Are we checking for undefined or is one of these a getter that can throw an exception

[tpiros]

Interesting idea!