[Python-ideas] Re: "return if <expression>"

On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 04:02, MRAB wrote:

On 2020-06-20 02:22, Robert DeLanghe wrote:

...

You can already do compact conditional returns with the current syntax:

def foo(a, b): return (a != b or None) and a * b

or even:

foo = (lambda a, b: (a != b or None) and a * b)

both return:

foo(2, 5) # 10 foo(1, 1) # None

... but clarity would be better.

That can be written more clearly:

def foo(a, b): return a * b if a != b else None

I find the non-compact version to be clearer: def foo(a, b): if a != b: return a*b return None

...

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 4:20 AM Serhiy Storchaka mailto:storchaka@gmail.com> wrote:

18.06.20 15:30, Daniel. пише: > I love the do_stuff if cond syntax in Ruby and in perl. It's very > natural to real, much more to follow than if cond: do_stuff > > But still I don't think that it is enough to demand a language change. > > Something near this is to have a default of none for > > A if B else None > > So we can ommit the else None part, but this goes against the explicit > is better than implicit

Only around 10% of "if" expressions have "else None" part. It is not enough to justify a new syntax (even if ignore other objections).

_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/J7TH3N... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/