@@ -613,13 +613,14 @@ those ideas are recorded here.

The ``None``-aware syntax applies to attribute and index access, so it seems

natural to ask if it should also apply to function invocation syntax. It might

be written as ``foo?()``, where ``foo`` is only called if it is not None. This

idea was quickly rejected, for several reasons.

First, no other mainstream language has such syntax. Second, Python evaluates

arguments to a function before it looks up the function itself, so

``foo?(bar())`` would still call ``bar()`` even if ``foo`` is ``None``. This

behaviour is unexpected for a so-called "short-circuiting" operator.

be written as ``foo?()``, where ``foo`` is only called if it is not None.

This has been rejected on the basis of the proposed operators being intended

to aid traversal of partially populated hierarchical data structures, *not*

for traversal of arbitrary class hierarchies. This is reflected in the fact

that none of the other mainstream languages that already offer this syntax

have found it worthwhile to support a similar syntax for optional function

invocations.

``?`` Unary Postfix Operator

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~