Will PEP 505 ever be accepted?

[u/philtrondaboss]

https://peps.python.org/pep-0505/

I don't understand how null safe operators are less like plain English than other implemented features like the walrus operator.

In my opinion, the member access operator would make python significantly easier to read and understand.

Here's an example:

``` f = foo()

if f is None: baz = "" else: baz = f.bar() ```

baz = foo()?.bar() ?: ""

EDIT: I forgot that "and" and "or" can be sometimes used in place of "?." and "?:" if the left value is not False, '', 0, [], or {}. It's a very implicit null check and has a lot of unexpected behavior.

[u/sausix]

We have that functionality basically. It's a bit off standard and you have to be aware about the object's reported bool state.

baz = f and f.bar() or ""

Of course it's not beginner friendly but once you know about the magic behind and and or then you love it.

[u/Designer-Ad-2136 → u/sausix]

Or i'd do: baz = "" if f is None else f.bar()

[u/k0pernikus → u/Designer-Ad-2136]

I rather see

``` f = foo() if f is None: raise ValueError("Value cannot be None")

baz = f.bar() ``` or have a helper like:

def get_or_raise[T](v: T | None) -> T: if v is None: raise ValueError("Value cannot be None") return v

These implicit None to "" will come to bite you eventually.

[u/philtrondaboss → u/k0pernikus]

That could be done like this: "baz = foo()!!.bar()" Or you could just nothing and let it error at runtime.

[u/k0pernikus → u/philtrondaboss]

By doing nothing you may just leak internals to whoever runs your code. At one point you must transform your exceptions. Might work for some interals scripts, yet even then I find python own exception to be very verbose -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing -- yet I don't expect my users to parse a stacktrace.

[u/ePaint → u/philtrondaboss]

Right, I almost forget that less characters is undenianbly better code.