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

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 4:20 AM Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com
> <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/J7TH3N76S6C7CITCYCJWI76Y2F6DHPGF/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/