PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative

[Joshua Marshall]

Nice.  Gets my vote.

holger krekel <pyth at devel.trillke.net> wrote:

> I am still wondering if there is a simple way to fix the current 
> ternary op "x and y or z".  Everybody knows by now that 
> this "fails" if y is a false value.  Otherwise
> it works ok and is used in today's code everywhere. 

> Inspired by "do the simplest thing that can possibly work"
> i now think that 

>         x and y else z

> might just do it and avoid the need for a new construct.  
> It's a very minor change just for fixing the problem at hand.  
> It should be obvious what it does.  

> if 'x' is true then 'y' is the result.  Else 'y' is the
> result.  So it doesn't matter if 'y' has a false value. 
> Yes, it looks unusal but it is a simple "non-destructive"
> change which the people who now dislike PEP308 could
> probably live with. 

> It has the positive side effect that explaining this
> ternary op variation goes hand in hand with explaining
> how and/or works in python.  And it acknowledges the
> fact that we "almost" have a ternary op. Also it reads 
> left to right and the alternatives "y else z"
> read well. 

> regards,

>     holger