Replace existence check with optional chaining

[prsantos-com]

Changes
Replaced the logical expression that checks for null/undefined with the optional chaining operator (?.) as per sonarcloud rule s6582.

Issues

[prsantos-com]

Hi, just wondering if I need to do anything more to get this merged, otherwise I'll continue to wait.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[jellyfin-bot]

Cloudflare Pages deployment

Latest commit	0b1259b9b93c2525e9b4c5b6a5086670af99bf08
Status	✅ Deployed!
Preview URL	https://35f0525a.jellyfin-web.pages.dev
Type	🔀 Preview

[thornbill]

Hi, just wondering if I need to do anything more to get this merged, otherwise I'll continue to wait.

Hey @prsantos-com, no there isn't anything else that you need to do. I'm just a bit behind on reviews. As long as a PR doesn't have conflicts, I will get to it eventually. If you want to help things move faster, I would welcome your input in the form of reviews on other open PRs.

Thanks for your contribution!

[prsantos-com]

Hey @prsantos-com, no there isn't anything else that you need to do. I'm just a bit behind on reviews. As long as a PR doesn't have conflicts, I will get to it eventually. If you want to help things move faster, I would welcome your input in the form of reviews on other open PRs.

Thanks for your contribution!

Hey @thornbill, I would be happy to review other open PRs. Which ones should I review first? Is there a particular way that I should go about doing this? I'm open to reading any guidelines specific to the project regarding PR reviews.

[thornbill]

I normally use this query to find PRs that are ready for review: https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin-web/pulls?q=is%3Apr+draft%3Afalse+-label%3Astale+-label%3A%22merge+conflict%22+-label%3Abackend+-label%3Ablocked+-label%3Aupstream+-label%3Adependencies+is%3Aopen

The main thing would be testing that the changes function as expected and there are not any obvious code errors being introduced. Thanks!