What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
blog.ivankahl.com
What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
1–10 of 174 posts
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#2Isn't this more confusing? Because it skip the code if the value is null and I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#3Isn't this more confusing? Because it skip the code if the value is null and I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
It’s for the use case where they’d skip it anyway so that would be intended behavior.
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#4Looks interesting & I'm excited to try this out myself. I like the more verbose null/error handling personally in professional code, but maybe that's because im still working in framework! I'll certainly be using these in my personal projects that'll be on .NET 10
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#5I’d rather be explicit. If the value is null then it should be explicitly handled.
I feel like this is another step in the race to add every conceivable feature to a language, for the sake of it.
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#6Isn't this more confusing? Because it skip the code if the value is null and I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
> I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
I think it is for situations where the programmer wants to check a child property but the parent object may be null. If the parent is expected to be null sometimes, the syntax lets the programmer express "try to get this value, but if we can't then move on" without the boilerplate of explicitly checking null (which may be a better pattern in some cases).
It's sort of like saying:
- Get the value if you can, else move on. We know it might not be there and it's not a big deal.
v.s.
- The value may not be there, explicitly check and handle it because it should not be null.
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#7I'm looking forward to being able to use this. It doesn't sound like much but those extra three lines and variable assignment is duplicated a ton of times across our codebase so it'll be a nice change
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#8Isn't this more confusing? Because it skip the code if the value is null and I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
That's already the case for the null coalescing operator when it ends in a method call: the method call is skipped if the base is null. For instance, we can invoke event handlers with "myEvent?.Invoke(...);" and the call will be skipped if there are no event handlers registered, and this is the canonical way to do it.
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#9I’d rather be explicit. If the value is null then it should be explicitly handled. I feel like this is another step in the race to add every conceivable feature to a language, for the sake of it.
[deleted]
Re: What's New in C# 14: Null-Conditional Assignments
#10Isn't this more confusing? Because it skip the code if the value is null and I don't think it is normal to follow the flow assuming nothing has happened.
From the article:
> If config?.Settings is null, the assignment is skipped.
If the right hand expression has side effects, are they run? I guess they do, and that would make the code more predictable.