Steven D'Aprano wrote:
But that one is ugly (that is, I don't think anyone *likes* the syntax, it's just considered the least worst), and some of us consider that its usefulness is dubious, or at least weak. I think the main reason that Python has a ternary if statement is to stop people writing the error-prone:
cond and x or y
as a short-circuit ternary if.
That's actually a good point - eliminating the persistent use of buggy workarounds was definitely one of the major motivations behind accepting PEP 308. In this case, there *are* no buggy workarounds: if you want to trap exception, you have to use a real statement. Without that additional motivation of bug prevention, I really doubt this proposal is going to go anywhere. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------