This meta-RFC proposes removing the previously accepted RFC on safe navigation operator. This is probably going to be disappointing but I feel like this is the best course of action that reflects our ideals in language evolution.
## Problem
The RFC specifies a new navigation operator, `?.`, that returns `nil` when the left hand side is `nil`, as well as skipping the rest of the indexed chain evaluation (e.g. `vehicle.Turret?.Frame.CFrame.LookVector` evaluates to `nil` if `vehicle.Turret` is `nil`). Initially the RFC only specifies this one operator, although future extensions like `?:`, `?[]`, `?()` are possible -- the RFC stands on its own, but it opens the path to more "nil-safe" operators in the future.
Unfortunately, we discovered a significant problem (after the RFC was merged) in the operator, in its interaction with the Roblox instance hierarchy. This is a userdata based DOM tree that (unfortunately) overloads __index to access children, and (fortunately?) attempting to access a non-existent child raises an error. As such, it's not compatible with this proposal in the sense that trying to use `?.` in combination with the instance hierarchy will only work if the child is present, and will raise an error otherwise.
## Alternatives
There are several ways to address that problem and still ship this; all of them are unsatisfactory:
1. We can change the instance hierarchy at Roblox to return `nil` instead. If Luau existed 15 years ago with `?.` feature, we probably would not have implemented dot-access in the first place, or maybe had it return `nil`... However, at present this is a very significant change that very dramatically changes the contract around instance access and may have large unintended consequences. It's something that isn't obviously a good idea in the first place, and not something we'd want to do for a single language feature as other features may pull us into maintaining the status quo instead.
2. We can ignore this footgun and/or try to help with static analysis. The issue here is that static analysis must depend on us knowing the precise type and tree location of the first object in the chain, something that will very often not work reliably, and the pattern is too convenient and too common - so we should probably admit that with or without analysis, people will be hitting this often accidentally. This can be treated as a reasonable compromise - we're adding a convenient feature that requires a little care around some constructs, and as long as the users "know what they are doing" it's going to be okay - but my perspective is that we should try to keep the language as free of footguns / as orthogonal / as simple as possible, and any feature that has significant issues around these must be a critical feature we can't live without for us to tolerate these.
3. We can introduce a new metamethod, `__safeindex`, that will be called for `?.` instead of `__index`, if present. This metamethod can then be defined for Roblox instance hierarchy to return `nil`. My perspective here is that while it removes the footgun, it violates the orthogonality / simplicity of the null safety operators in general - just for this one operator it now requires new VM opcodes, new table lookup functions that use either `__safeindex` or `__index` metamethods, and creates questions for any future null safety operators wrt whether or not we will go through the same process for consistency (eventually yielding `__safecall`, `__safenewindex`, `__safeadd` etc. in the extreme), or if `__safeindex` is a one-off ad hoc addition to solve a specific problem we have for one of the (well, largest) users of Luau language. This turns the safe navigation operator from "cheap convenient syntax sugar" to "full blown operator every element of the stack must be aware of", which - again, in my perspective - shifts the balance for this feature, as the costs no longer seem to justify the benefit.
## Conclusion
While we have ways forward for this proposal, they either make the language less robust [when used in Roblox environment], mean this feature is much less orthogonal/simple than initially understood, or mean we need to dramatically change the access rules [in Roblox environment] for a single small language feature.
While it's unusual to judge a feature of a general purpose language based on a single user of the said language, given Luau's heritage and the fact that the majority of the programmers who interact with Luau presently use it in context of Roblox, I think we must take this into account. These situations will probably happen rarely - in fact it's the first feature proposal like this! - but when they do, we should strive to keep the language simple and devoid of footguns, thus I believe it's overall beneficial to maintain the status quo and not implement this proposal.
As suggested in the RFC, this still means you can use `and` operator as a replacement for very basic single-element chains, e.g. `dog and dog.name`, but for more complex chains with `nil`s unfortunately the existing longer patterns must be used. We plan to look into common subexpression elimination that, under certain conditions, will allow us to maximally efficiently evaluate seemingly redundant expressions like `foo and foo.bar and foo.bar.baz`, and if that doesn't work you'd need to settle for multiple expressions to evaluate these chains efficiently in presence of nils - that said, I think in this case shorter code for some cases like this is not a strong enough motivation to ship the feature in the face of the problem discussed above.
cc @Kampfkarren for visibility
* Respect useLineBreaks for union/intersect toString
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: Andy Friesen <andy.friesen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Andy Friesen <andy.friesen@gmail.com>
Adds an option to hide the `self: type` argument as the first argument in the string representation of a named function type var if the ftv hasSelf.
Also added in a test for the original output (i.e., if the option was disabled)
I didn't apply this option in the normal `Luau::toString()` function, just the `Luau::toStringNamedFunction()` one (for my usecase, that is enough + I felt like a named function would include the method colon `:` to signify self). If this is unintuitive, I can also add it to the general `Luau::toString()` function.
Update `__pairs` note with `__iter`, change `__len` to unsure as with `__iter` lack of `__len` on tables is the only issue preventing complete user created containers.
Update the typecheck.md page to talk about singleton types and their uses, tagged unions.
As a driveby, improve the documentation on type refinements. And delete the unknown symbols part, this is really dated.
* Update docs/_pages/typecheck.md to fix a typo
Co-authored-by: Arseny Kapoulkine <arseny.kapoulkine@gmail.com>