Optional Chaining or Explicit Guards for Nullable CoffeeScript Data?

CoffeeScript 2 projects that consume nullable API payloads need a convention for choosing between ?. and explicit if guards. The concrete constraint is preserving visible failure handling without adding repetitive checks to every property access.

?. offers concise, null-safe access and compiles to JavaScript optional chaining. Explicit guards make invalid states and fallback paths visible, but increase verbosity. The distinction between null and undefined may matter to application logic, and CoffeeScript 1’s ? should not be treated as equivalent to CoffeeScript 2’s ?.. This question therefore assumes CoffeeScript 2 and a defined Node.js and source-map toolchain.

The unresolved decision is where optional access is appropriate versus where a missing value must trigger explicit domain handling. Generated JavaScript and runtime behavior should be compared under the supported versions before a convention is adopted.

• Should ?. be limited to incidental absence, with explicit guards reserved for domain errors and fallbacks?
• Which CoffeeScript compiler, Node.js runtime, and source-map versions should form the verification baseline?