[Pitch] Extending optional chains to include for loops

I just would like to note that currently the pitch draft is in some kind of hibernation:

  • The “Detailed design” section is still missing, and I cannot deliver that, I am not able to provide an implementation.
  • Support for the described idea by the community seems to be limited.

There seem to be quite opposite opinions about the proposed feature. For me, without this feature “for-in” loops are kind of unusable in many cases where I need some kind of “for” loop, while for others the usage of optional chaining in a “for-in” loop is too easily overlooked.

At this point there will not be any further action on my part. I tried to include all known objections into the pitch draft, so it should be a good overview over the pros, the cons, and the alternatives. I will leave the pitch draft available at the current URL for a long time.